I am not here to deliver any regular lecture, or set address. I was not asked to do that. I was asked to come here and talk to you, and that is what I intend to do—talk to you upon a question that is as much your question as it is my question, that interests you as much as it does me,-a question that you desire to see settled as earnestly as I do,— although you and I may differ in regard to the best methods of settlement.

I always wish when I discuss this question before an audience, that I could call up every man and woman and swear them on the Bible as a jury, to render an honest verdict on all the facts in the case.

A great business-a great traffic-is on trial for its life before a jury of American citizens. The temperance men of this country have indicted the liquor traffic. The counts of the indictment are as positive and plain as the counts of an indictment against any criminal, and the people are the jury who are to determine the truth or falsity of this indictment. Therefore I always feel that what I may say will do no good unless it shall lead the people to act-perhaps first to think, and then to act.

When I leave the platform to-night I shall be no better temperance man than I am now. If I accomplish any good it will be because I appeal to your reason and your judgment; that when you go from this place, you will be willing to act up to the full measure of your convictions. If I could, by any trick of sophistry or any power of personal magnet

ism, lead every man and woman in this house to shout for temperance, I would not do it, unless your judgment, reason, and intelligence told you to shout. I would give little for a temperance man who was made a temperance man by temporary excitement. We are not in this conflict for a day, we are not in it for a week, we are not in it for a year, but we have enlisted in this campaign to win.

The purpose of the temperance men of this country has been for years well defined, and they have not changed it, and will not change it until victory shall come. They demand the complete outlawry of drunkard-making, and they will accept nothing less.

There is no doubt about the aims of the temperance movement. The temperance men intend to destroy the drunkard-making system of America root and branch. There is no such thing as compromise upon the issue. In the end, the liquor traffic of this country will abolish temperance, or temperance will abolish the liquor traffic. The issue is squarely made and squarely joined before the people, so I say I would not lead any man into the temperance ranks unless he comes because he believes it is right and comes to stay. I would have you take the facts to your home, to your office, to your store or place of business, and when you are alone, and away from all exciting influences, sit down calmly and honestly, and, after having examined the liquor side of the question, and the temperance side of the question,

make up your verdict in accordance with your honest judgment. If I should succeed in convincing you that I am right, if your judgment, reason, intelligence tells you that I am right, and then you refuse to work up to the full measure of your convictions, you are guilty of an injustice, or cowardice, of which I would not believe you capable.

The whole issue involved is simply a question of fact. If the dram-shop of this country is a blessing; if it makes honest voters, honest citizens, kind husbands and loving fathers; if it leads to an observance of the Christian Sabbath; if it leads to morality, manhood and intelligence; if it discourages crime, vice, pauperism, illegal voting and false swearing, then there are no two positions for you and me to take on the question. If the liquor traffic is a blessing, every patriotic American, every man who loves his country, owes it to his citizenship, to his own sense of honor, to stand by that traffic, talk for it, work for it, vote for it; if he is a praying man, pray for it; if he is a preacher, he is a humbug if he will not preach for it.

If the reverse is true—if the liquor traffic of this country makes drunkards, cruel husbands and unkind fathers; if it breaks women's hearts and degrades children; if it fills our penitentiaries, our almshouses and our jails; if it stimulates riot in our great cities; if it stands and laughs at the stuffing of the ballotbox; if it causes men to swear falsely on the witness stand or in the jury box; in other words, if it is an

enemy to this government; if it is an enemy of law and order and civilization, then will you give me a single reason under heaven why you, as an honest man, or I, as an honest man, can vote for and sustain it with such a record.

We are not to settle this question as individuals. The institution is a public one. If it is destroyed, it will be destroyed by the state and national governments. The part that you will take, the part that I shall take in destroying it, must be the part of citizens of the state and of the republic. The question then is, not how it will affect me individually, but "What is for the best good of the whole state?"

You should weigh honestly every argument that liquor men may bring, before making up your verdict. You should weigh just as honestly the arguments of the temperance men.

A man asked me some time ago: "Finch, would you advise a temperance man to read whisky papers?" I answered: "I would not give much for a temperance man if he would not do it."

You are not to settle this question as an individual. You are a citizen of the state, and when you vote on this question, the influence of your vote does not rest with yourself, but influences the whole state. You must forget your individuality and remember your position as the patriot and citizen; and if there are any arguments in favor of the liquor traffic, you owe it to your own sense of honor, manhood and truth to weigh carefully every argument that the liquor men may

bring in making up your verdict. Take the liquor traffic and all the good it has done, and put it on one side of your scales of judgment. Do not leave out anything. If there is any doubt, give the criminal the benefit of it. That is the rule of law we want applied in this case. After putting all the good it has done into one side of the scale, put all the evil it has done into the other side. Take its record in this country, weigh it honestly and well, and if you believe, after an investigation of this kind, that the liquor traffic has done more good than it has done injury; that it is a blessing to the country; that it tends to perpetuate the government, then it is your duty, beyond all question, to stand by and support the traffic. If the dramshop of this country is an enemy to the state, an enemy of our institutions, I cannot see how any honest man dare stand and defend itdefend an institution that is an enemy to the highest interests of his country.

From this point we can certainly go forward and look at the facts in the case. Every person who reads must be satisfied that this question must be settled in this country. The question, "What shall the government do with the alcoholic liquor traffic?" is one that must be heard. We cannot laugh it down; we cannot sneer it down; we cannot bulldoze it down; and there is not money enough in the blood-stained coffers of the drunkard-makers to prevent the people of this land from rendering a verdict on the facts in this case.