Rensselaer Republican, Volume 24, Number 6, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 8 October 1891 — S EN ATOR GILMAN ANSWERS A SMARL ALECK. [ARTICLE]

S EN ATOR GILMAN ANSWERS A SMARL ALECK.

A FROHIfitHCFiIST WHO MONKEYED WITH -3 A METAPHORICAL euzzsaw

Goodiand. Sept. 26th 1891. EDITGB Bi yubljcan:—The following letter which! copy —all but the signature —has been sent me frein a citizen of your county. I claim do right to answer private letters through your paper. But the writer of the letter — is an old friend of mine, for whom I have great respect, believing him honestj gincere, and faithful to what he believes the right. I will also state that he and I, are in perfect acccrd in thinking the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors to be drank as a beverage ought to be prohibited by law. We differ as to the way of doing it And there are other differences in the matter between . us, which will appear to those who care to read his letter and my reply thereto. — :

’ The Letter. Rensselaer, Lnd*, 9-17-91 Hon. W. W. Gilmak Goodland Ind. Friend Gilman. As you have been giving us some articles on “Uncle Sam” rather discouraging as to his business ability, allow me to suggest that you write another—m which you will have no trouble in establishing his ability as a business man. As it now stands —from your point view—it leaves the poor old fellow with rather a bad reputation as to his business ability.

Now give us at least one “article” on Uncle Sam as a “Distiller and Brewer.’ In this you can show how the business has aiiray prospered under his management—That in 1862 it started with less than 4| gal. per capita, steadily and continuously increased to 12| in 1889, over 18| in 90. Refer to President Harrison’s last Message to Congress where he congratulates the people on the increase of internal revenue to the am’t of over $11,000,000, the year previous <fc also refer to the last month’s reports, where there was over SI,OOO, 000, increase, mostly from his management of those two branches of business. Then you can also refer to the general prosperity of those in partnership with him. Then you can take a little credit to your party in starting him in this profitable enterprise, how while it was started as a war measure —it has been kept up as a power in peace. Please don’t fail to let us hear from you upon “Uncle Sam” as a “Distiller and Brewer” at your earliest convenience. As ever your friend. ( ) “REPLY.” UNCLE SAM AS A BREWER AND DIB- - ■ I have heretofore in my writing tried to place myself where I could see both sides of the subject, and have in every case stated the truth as I see it, end in no case have I taken a partisan stand, nor shall I handle this matter differently—except it be to refute a calumny, or disprove a slander. I have no doubt that “Uncle Sam”-Lshould he go into the business of “distilling and brewing,” would succeed as well, as he would in any other business venture in which he has had no experience. It is plainly suggested in the above letter, that he is now, and has been for a longtime in the business, and that he is the manager of it He is also said to be in partnership with others therein. And also that the Republican Party started him in the enterprise.

As to the first charge? is 4t true or false? If true, Uncle Sam has cither brewed or distilled liquor himself, or has employed some one else to do it for him. There is not a particle of evidence that he ever brewed a drop of beer, or distilled one drop of alcohbl, or any other intoxicating liquor, nor a particle of evidence that he ever employed any other person to do any such th ing. And tbe persona who make such charges, if they were required to in a Court of Justice where they could be held for perjury for false swearing would not dare testify to any such thing. Nor can it truthfully be said that he ever in any manner encouraged the business, or in any manner increased it, no? that he ever made, or helped to make a drunkard. If then he never made, or caus-

-f4 to be made a drop of liquor, it follows that he is neither a brewer distiller, nor engaged in the business. Nor is there any truth that he manages the business, or has a word to say as to how much, oi how little, or what kind of liquor shall lie made, or whether it shall be made at all. /

I heard a public speaker say that the government said to the citizen. “I want you to be my partner in the whiskey business, I want you all tbe capital, do all the work, take all the risks, and pay me ninety per cent of the profits.” I knew the speaker was tray off, but what he said was as true, as is the statement that this govern-

mint is a Brewer, Distiller, or a partner or manager in the business. What then shall we say, that these men mean to tell ah absolute falsehood, without the least provocation, or hope of reward? Not so, but it is written. “The zeal of mine house hath eaten me up.” They are only a little warped. Hear the truth! Many years ago, such persons as chose to make and sell intoxicating liquors did so. As far as federal law was concerned, they had the same right to make and sell, as did tbe farmer to raise and sell grain. “Uncle Sam.” up to time of the civil war, paid no attention to this business, but when he needed money to arm and equip the armies he levied a tax for revenue on nearly every kind of business, and on this the heaviest of all. The maker, the seller, the dealer were all taxed enormously, and the government received a large amount of rev c nue from this tax, and does yet. The tax thus required of them —if paid—entitled them to go on in the business of seiling liquor just the same as they had been doing before the law was enacted, it did not change the nature of their business, nor the quality of the liquor sold, nor in any manner to increase the business, unless the taxing of a business encourages it. Since the large reduction of the “public debt,” the government has from time to time abolished the internal revenue tax until intoxicating liquors and tobacco are about all there is left.

There have been some attempts to do away with this tax, but there is a feeling among the people that this business ought to be taxed, and some states are increasing it very largely. If tbe government should abolish this tax, the very men who now claim it is a partner and manager in the business, would then say, that the government makes whiskey free and taxes honest industry. “Uncle Sam” taxed hotel keepers, auctioneers, doctors of law and medicine, but it is not claimed that he was a partner or manager in any of those arrangements. He received a revenue from the making of matches, but it is not claimed he was a match maker. The state of Indiana —for the benefit of the clerks—taxes for a marriage license, is the state a partner in the marriage? But the “lettei” says that my party-the Republican-started“ Uncle Sam” in this enterprise, that is, the republicans had charge of the government during the war,* and passed th© bills taxing all kinds of business to raise money to save the national life, suppose “Sam” had taxed every other industry and let whisky go free. The writer of the above letter would then have been happy if we may judge by what he writes now. He was at that time a Republican in good standing, holding up the hands of 'Abraham Lincoln as the Chief Executive of the Nation, and head and leader of the only political party who favored using anything stronger than moral suasion to put down the Rebellion.

I admire above that of all other men, the character and true loyal manhood of “A. Lincoln?” I* am iff that" time of trial who loved their country, andwhohelped—asUest they could—to preserve the Union. If it was wrong to make the whiskey business pay its share of that great debt, then Lincoln and his co-adjutois were sinners. The writer of the above letter thinks it was discreditable to tax the whisky business. Before I could think as he does my moral and intellectual nature would have to be obliterated and rewritten from a different standpoint of what I now think right and just I am thankful that I lived in Lincoln’s time, thankful for the great multitude of patriotic heroes who gave their lives in the cause for which he died.

There is no need, brother, because you have “fallen from grace,” that you fling the republican war record at an “old timer,” all true Republicans glory in that record. There is but one handle for the bird party men to cling, it is this: “That taxing the whisky business by the government has made it respectable. It may seem more respectable to them, than it was before it was taxed, but that it a matter of opinion, no law could be framed thai would make the business of drhnkard making respectable in my mind.

1 here is no use, my brother, to assume an “I am holier than tHou ] attitude,” each legislative District in this land is entitled to one voice ! in the council, and that suck voice 1 be in accord with the public senti-1 mentofthe District Each citizen has the right to do his best to form the political sentiment of his, or any number of districts in any way he shall deem best. If he thinks he can do more by withdrawing from j the fight, and standing on the high mount of den unication, that is this I

right. A good cause never requires special or false pleading, and false accusations are in their nature a “boomerang,” that' may injure a good cause. I believe the third party prohibs are sincere, or that they think they are. They have pointed out the “Chasm” which all others must cross tobe saved. They are therefore martyrs whose memory shall have a sweet smell to waft down the ages of future reform. Let every good citizen, thank them for what they have done find what they have tried to dodo make the whisky business appear as it is ‘•odious.” It is said *'a little leayen, leaveneth the whole lump” but that it may work, the “leaven” must be in. the pan. The prohibs were the active leaven, which might have lightened, the whole, but they got out of the pan, andaway from the dough, their influence is thus lost, they are but a “corps” of observation up out of the battle. Clothes—to be of services—must be worn instead offlapping in the wind. Come down, brother,"where your influence can be felt. A preacher never will Convert a soul, unless he put himself efi rapport with the sinner. Wm. W. Gilman.