gaugers," but he thought it quite likely that the new party movement would find itself hampered in its attempt to organize itself.

Oliver W. Stewart, the permanent chairman of the Prohibition National Convention, and president of the Illinois Christian Endeavor Society, in speaking of the convention, said: "I could not and would not join the movement for another political party. I stood for equal suffrage before I became a party Prohibitionist, and I voted for free silver in our State Convention, and in the National Convention that has just closed here, but I will not allow my disappointment over the defeat of suffrage and silver to drive me out of the party. It is no easy thing to perfect the organization of a new party. I am afraid that my friends on the 'broadgauge' side, by whom I was made permanent chairman, have made a mistake in attempting such a task. I still believe that we could have gained thousands of votes in Illinois, as well as in other States, on a broad platform, but we were defeated, and I propose to abide by the decision of the convention. This we would have asked of the other side, had we won.'

The following clear statement of the conception, introduction, and passage of the substitute or single-issue platform, at the Pittsburg Convention, by its author, was written to one of the journals of the Prohibition Party:

6

"DEAR SIR:-In view of your report of the Convention and editorials just at hand, I deem it due to the cause of truth and justice that I correct some of your statements. You say: The fact is, that the single-plank platform presented by Mr. Patton was prepared before the convention and brought to the Convention with the knowledge of prominent leaders in the narrow-gauge ranks, for the purpose of being introduced whenever a good opportunity presented.'

"You have certainly been misinformed in making such statements. The facts concerning the single-issue platform are as follows:

"A few days before the National Convention I told Oliver W. Stewart, a broad-gauger, at my office, that I expected to prepare a single-issue platform and present it in the Convention as a substitute, whether the free-silver plank was inserted or not. I did not have the time to prepare it before I went to the Convention, but prepared it in my room at the hotel the night before its adoption. With the exception of R. W. Dillar, of Springfield, Ill., who roomed with me at the hotel, no one knew of my having prepared the resolution, until after the noon session, when I read it over to Mr. Whipple, of The Lever, and Mr. Wheelock, of Chicago. I stated to John G. Woolley about the same time, that I had such a resolution prepared.

"Upon the vote on the financial plank, I voted with the 'broad-gaugers' for its adoption, and endeavored to get the floor for its advocacy. If you will refer to the columns of your paper in the report of our Illinois Convention, you will ascertain the fact that I, then and there, advocated and voted for free silver. I have, however, from the first advocated a single-issue platform, or a 'broad-gauge plat

form' upon all issues. I regarded this as the only logical position we could assume. I positively deny that my action was induced by the influence of the leaders on either side, or was anticipated or even known by the leaders on either side. "After the defeat of the financial plank, some one, I think Mr. Beveridge, of Nebraska, came to John G. Woolley and conferred with him, and Mr. Woolley said to me, Now is the time to introduce your single-issue platform. Something was said to the effect that the free-silver men would favor such a platform in preference to a broadgauge platform with no financial plank. I then introduced my platform and moved to substitute it for all the platform before the convention.

"When I obtained the chair's recognition to speak in behalf of my motion, I went to the platform and was there met by Governor St. John, who said to me: 'Patton, won't you let me have two minutes ahead of you? I have something to suggest which will accomplish the same result I think you are aiming at.' I asked him what it was he wanted to suggest, and he not replying, I did not yield to him.

"After my address Governor St. John was recognized and stated to the Convention that inasmuch as he could not get a declaration on other issues to suit him, he wanted to see the platform as narrow as the narrow-gauge men wanted it, and he then said, 'I will therefore support Mr. Patton's resolution.' Immediately after this speech, you, Mr. Editor, came to the front, and, as I understood you, said you were glad the time had come when the platform should be either the one thing or the other. That you were tired of this fight in the party and would vote for the resolution offered by myself.

"In doing this both you and Governor St. John led me to believe, and no doubt the Convention, that you welcomed this as a compromise, and intended to vote for it in good faith. Why you both stated you would support this resolution, and after it was carried, bolted, I am at a loss to understand. Especially am I amazed to see you and others attempt to justify your bolting upon the ground of the adoption of my substitute after your public espousals of adoption.

"I presented and advocated the adoption of the substitute after careful consideration, believing that the time had come for concentration of all the Prohibition voters of the country into our party, and that we could only do so by leaving every Prohibitionist his convictions upon other issues. For its preparation and presentation, I must shoulder either the honor or the blame, but for its adoption you and Governor St. John and every one else who advocated its adoption or voted for it, must share either the honor or the blame.

"The attempt on your part, or any one else, to attribute the adoption of this platform to any antipathy to Woman Suffrage, must inevitably fail because of a lack of any truth for its foundation.

"As author of the platform I challenge the fullest investigation as to whether I have not always espoused the cause of woman's enfranchisement. I am of the firm conviction that in the end the cause of woman's enfranchisement and every other great reform movement must be the easier accomplished by the concentration of the enemies of the saloon into one party. The dram-shop stands in the road of all reform, and its destruction is logically the first work to be accomplished. With you I believe in the

restoration of the free coinage of silver, but, sir, with the liquor traffic in control of American politics, and with the breweries and distilleries owned and controlled by British capitalists, I do not expect to see their financial views defeated, until their power in American politics is destroyed by the destruction of the licensed saloon.

"I believe, with you, in Woman Suffrage, but I know that so long as the saloon continues as the school-house of American voters, our women will not receive justice. The prohibition of the liquor traffic is not only the greatest economic and moral question before the people, but it is the gateway to all other reforms. It was a conviction of this truth that led to the preparation of the substitute platform, and adoption of this new policy by the overwhelming vote of 650 to 150. To misrepresent it and attribute our action to some other cause can do no good to the National Party or humanity. Let the truth be spoken and the right will triumph.

"Yours respectfully,

"ROBERT H. PATTON."

The New York Voice, the leading organ of the Prohibition Party, thus defends the Pittsburg Convention and the Platform of the Prohibitionists:

"The founders of the Prohibition Party in 1869, in the reasons set forth for its organization, declared that the party's primary object was to suppress the liquor traffic. With that purpose absent or eclipsed there has never been any real reason for the existence of the party. However much may or may not have been associated in platform utterance with that object in the course of events, does not make at all unwise the position which this year presents