Our Democratic opponents, however, challenge the right of the Republican party to a renewal of public confidence. And on what grounds? Read their platform, and you will see that the first and principal plank is a general and very bitter denunciation of “all sumptuary laws, State or National,” and an emphatic demand for a return to the license system. They are opposed, the platform declares, “to the principle of constitutional prohibition.” They regard it as an invasion of “the individual liberty and manhood of the citizen.” And they favor, “instead of constitutional or statutory prohibition, a well-regulated and just license system.”
The Republican platform, on the other hand, declares that “the people of Kansas have adopted prohibition as the settled policy of the State, and have declared that the saloon, with its corrupt and demoralizing influences, must go.” The Republicans are, therefore, the platform declares, “in favor of carrying out this verdict of the people, by enacting laws to enforce it, and by faithfully executing those laws, so that the sale of intoxicating liquors, except for the purposes specified in the Constitution, may be made impossible.”
On this question, as you will see, the two parties radically disagree. The Republicans take their stand fairly on the Constitution of the State—on the action of the sovereign people of the State, who by their votes have placed the liquor traffic and the saloon under the ban of their organic law. The Democrats denounce the Constitution and laws of the State, and favor a return to the license system.
Prohibition, it should be remembered, was not originally a party or partisan policy. Neither the Republican nor the Democratic party is responsible for the fact that the prohibition amendment to the Constitution was adopted. That was the act of the sovereign people of Kansas, acting in their individual capacity, without partisan or party indorsement or direction.
HISTORIC PARALLELS.
But in another sense, the Republican party is responsible for prohibition. It was always and is everywhere the party of law and good government. It stood for the constitution and laws during the dark and desolate days of 1861–5, and grew to manhood amid the perils and trials of a monstrous rebellion against a people’s government, and the people’s verdict that the aggressions of human slavery must cease. When the people of Kansas adopted the constitutional amendment of 1880, and decreed that the saloon, with its corrupt and demoralizing influences, must go, the Republican party accepted this decision, and a Republican Legislature enacted laws to enforce it. The Democratic party, from that day to this, has constantly and persistently endeavored to nullify the constitutional amendment and the people’s verdict against the saloon. History, it is said, repeats itself, and certainly the history of the Democratic refusal to accept the decision of the people of Kansas on the question of prohibition, and the Democratic refusal to accept the result of the election of 1860, afford striking parallels. In 1860 slavery crouched behind armed rebellion; in 1886 the saloon crouches behind Democratic nullification. The Republican party was the party of the Constitution and the laws in 1861; it is the party of the Constitution and the laws to-day. In 1861 the Democratic party advocated and defended that sum of all villainies, human slavery; it is to-day advocating and defending that fruitful source of vice, poverty, and crime, the liquor traffic. The Republican party was right in 1861; it is right now. In 1865 it made every man beneath the flag free and equal, and to-day it is striving to make every home in Kansas a happier home. It has loyally and honestly accepted the solemn duty devolved upon it by the people’s verdict against the sale of intoxicating liquors except for certain specified purposes, and it intends to enforce this verdict faithfully and firmly.
THE GROWTH OF KANSAS SINCE THE PROHIBITION LAW TOOK EFFECT.
Our opponents assert, however, that prohibition has damaged the material prosperity of the State.
Where are the evidences to establish this fact? What is the truth? The prohibition amendment was adopted in 1880, and the first law to enforce it went into effect in May, 1881. We have had, therefore, more than five years of actual experience, and I appeal to the facts of the census to answer the assertion that prohibition has done injury to the material interests of Kansas.
In 1880 the population of the State was 996,096. We had been twenty-five years in attaining that population. To-day Kansas has not less than 1,500,000 inhabitants. In five years we have gained half a million. In 1880 only 55 towns and cities had a population exceeding 1,000, and six had each over 5,000. In 1885, 91 towns and cities each had over 1,000, and twelve had each over 5,000. In 1880 we had only 8,868,884 acres under cultivation; in 1885 we had 14,252,815 acres. In 1880 the farms of Kansas were valued at only $235,178,936, and the farm products for that year aggregated only $84,521,486; in 1885 the farms of the State were valued at $408,073,454, and the farm products of that year aggregated $143,577,018. In 1880 the live stock of Kansas was worth only $61,563,950; in 1885 it was worth $117,881,699. In 1880 the assessed valuation of the property of Kansas, real, personal and railroad, aggregated $160,891,689; in 1885 it aggregated $248,845,276. In 1880 we had only 3,104 miles of railway; we have now 5,117 miles. In 1880 we had 5,315 school houses; in 1885 we had 6,673. In 1880 we expended $1,818,336 for the support of our common schools; in 1885 we expended $2,977,763. In 1880 we had only 357 newspapers and 2,514 churches; in 1885 we had 581 newspapers and 3,976 churches.