USA > Rhode Island > Rhode Island : three centuries of democracy, Vol. II > Part 9
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100
*4 R. I. 324.
649
IDEALS AND STATE POLITICS
thus reducing opposition from general taxpayers. Fees were readjusted in 1843, and divided equally betwixt state and town. The first general local option law was enacted in 1845, result- ing within a short time afterward in a division of Rhode Island into "wet" and "dry" areas. "License" and "Prohibition" parties appeared at the polls in 1847; in that year Amos C. Barstow ran as the Prohibition candidate for mayor of Providence. The growth of the movement for prohibition in twenty years from the first public meeting in 1827 had been remarkable. In another five years, 1852, the General Assembly enacted a statewide prohibi- tory law, subject to confirmation or repeal by referendum; the people sustained prohibition, 9280 for, 8228 against. The law permitted sales for medicinal and mechanical purposes only, by one or two persons specially appointed in each town; four years later, 1856, sales for chemical, sacramental and culinary purposes were permitted. Rhode Island returned to license in 1863, as a war measure for revenue purposes, the state and towns dividing the proceeds.
Eleven years later, in 1874, a drastic prohibitory law was enacted. Manufacture except for export, keeping and selling except "for medicinal, artistic and mechanical purposes only and not to be drunk on the premises of the seller" were forbidden. Medical prescriptions con- taining alcohol could not be refilled. To enforce the statute the Governor was authorized to appoint a state constable, and the latter to appoint not exceeding seven deputies. Governor Howard, who in 1874 in his message to the General Assembly had directed attention to the evils of intemperance, though doubting "the practicability of enforcing, even to a moderate extent, a law absolutely prohibitory in its terms," reported in 1875 that "in view of the pow- erful organized opposition, the apathy of one portion of the public, the antipathy of another, and the lack of cooperation on the part of the peace officers of the state generally, the state constabulary force is not sufficiently large for the purposes of its design and creation." The Governor had collected statements from seventy-five citizens in various parts of the state, whose observations and reactions were colored by sympathy or antipathy that was scarcely concealed. The state constable reported 421 prosecutions, of which 306 were pending, 51 had been discontinued, 33 dismissed, and only six convictions. The constable reported further : "From the earliest movement the constabulary have been met with every device and obstacle that could be invented by its enemies, who were well aware that the prohibitory and constab- ulary laws, unless defeated in their operation, would be the ruin of their trade and hopes. They have fought us upon every point with an energy amounting in many instances even to vengeance and malice. And despairing of having sufficient strength of their own to accom- plish their purpose, they have called into requisition the assistance of the United States offi- cials. We were met at the outset by the information that the United States had attached eighteen of the largest stocks of liquors in the state. Keepers had been placed in charge who were, and had been for a long time, either a co-partner or employe of the owners-in many cases even the bartender who had, and still continued to sell liquors by the glass over the bar."
Before the January session, 1875, was at an end, an actual conflict had occurred, in which state, town and federal officers were involved, and the General Assembly appointed a special committee to investigate and report "all the facts connected with the recent alleged interrup- tion of certain state officers in the discharge of the duties of their office by individuals acting under federal or municipal authority, and the alleged interference of the state constabulary with the process of the United States." A majority and a minority report were presented by the committee. There was no substantial disagreement as to facts. The United States mar- shal had attached in August certain liquors on an original writ returnable to the United States Circuit Court and suffered the liquors to remain in the store of the defendant named in the writ, in the nominal custody of the defendant's bookkeeper. Not until October were the attached liquors placed behind a partition with locked doors. The arrangement was satisfac-
650
RHODE ISLAND-THREE CENTURIES OF DEMOCRACY
tory to the plaintiff on whose suit the writ had been served. The barrels and boxes attached were marked at first with chalk, and subsequently by labels. State constables visited the place on February 23, 1875; found the door of the partitioned storeroom open, and barrels from which liquor had been drawn in the storeroom, marked to indicate gauging by federal officers and manufacture after the attachment. The conclusion drawn inevitably was that the store- room partitioned for holding the attached liquors was used by the proprietor for the purpose of storing also a stock in trade from which sales were made. When the state constable under- took to seize and remove all liquor from the premises, and some had been removed, the mar- shal appeared, "forbade the removal, refused to point out the liquors covered by his attach- ment, attempted to use force to prevent the removal of the liquors, and finally by ordering the chief of police of the city of Providence, who was present with a strong body of police, by instructions from the mayor, to aid him, compelled the state constable and his deputies to submit to the force of numbers, and thus prevented any further removal of the liquors in the store." The majority "abstaining from the use of offensive terms or insinuations," deemed "it a sufficient discharge of the duty imposed upon them in this regard, to say that the liquors attached by the marshal were left almost as fully and freely at the disposal of the defendant in the suit as if no attachment had been made." The majority then commented upon the con- duct of the chief of police: "An intelligent and experienced and conscientious officer, he frankly admits his plain duty under the laws to yield obedience to the state constable when in the discharge of his duty. He saw the constable discharging his duty, was ordered to aid him with his police force, and excuses himself for disobedience by the remarkable statement that he was as long ago as in August last directed by the mayor, following the advice of the city solicitor, to obey the United States marshal when by him commanded. And to reconcile this conflict between the law as he understands it, and the order of his municipal superior, the chief of police explains that he obeys the marshal as a private citizen, and having doffed for the occasion his official character, he is no longer subject to the commands of the state constable ! He forgets that in thus easily shifting responsibility as he was obeying the mar- shal and refusing to obey the constable, because the breath of the marshal had transformed him from chief of police to a private citizen, he was exercising the power of chief by com- pelling the police force of the city to protect and uphold the violators of the law, and to pre- vent the officers of the state from even attempting to vindicate it." The majority recom- mended that the Governor be requested to cause to be prepared and transmitted to the Presi- dent of the United States a statement of the facts relating to the interference by the United States marshal for the district of Rhode Island with the state constable while in the discharge of his duty." The minority, "interpreting the resolution" as based "entirely upon the consti- tutional power of the legislature to make laws for present and future emergencies and which do not include any judicial power to make inquiry into the past as between outside parties not members of the legislature," found that the testimony "involves grave questions of law and right" which point "to no necessity for direct or indirect legislation," and suggested that "its publication should be held subject to your order, lest any action upon it by the committee might prejudice or forestall questions which belong to the court alone." The reports of major- ity and minority were "referred to the Governor, to adopt such measures in the premises, not repugnant to law as he shall deem best conducive to the interest of the state and the enforce- ment of the laws." At the May session, 1875, the prohibition law of 1874 and the law creat- ing the state constabulary both were repealed. The General Assembly enacted a local option law for towns and created for Providence a license commission, to be elected by the board of aldermen. The statute of 1875 was a carefully considered piece of legislation drafted by a joint special committee. It created a state police consisting of "the sheriffs of the several counties and their deputies, and the town sergeants, constables and chiefs of police."
651
IDEALS AND STATE POLITICS
The Republican party split on the issue of prohibition in the spring of 1875. The Demo- crats polled an average vote of 5100 for a ticket headed by Charles R. Cutler of Warren. Joshua M. Addeman as Secretary of State, Willard B. Sayles as Attorney-General, and Sam- uel Clarke as General Treasurer, were elected with an average of 16,900 votes. For Governor, Rowland Hazard, Republican and Prohibition, polled 8724 votes to 8368 for Henry Lippitt, Republican. For Lieutenant Governor Daniel Day, Republican and Prohibition, polled 9183 votes to 7912 for Henry T. Sisson. Because no candidate for Governor or Lieutenant Gov- ernor had received the majority required by the Constitution, the election of both officers was by the General Assembly, which chose Henry Lippitt as Governor and Henry T. Sisson as Lieutenant Governor. The same General Assembly enacted the license law of 1875. In the following year, Henry Lippitt was reelected as Governor by the General Assembly after fail- ure to attain a majority of the popular vote, although he polled 1956 more votes than Albert C. Howard, running as Republican and Prohibitionist. The Republican party reunited in 1877 and elected Charles C. Van Zandt as Governor, with Republican and Prohibition indorse- ment, in a close contest with Jerothmul B. Barnaby, Democrat. Governor Van Zandt was reelected without Republican opposition in 1878 and 1879. In the following year Alfred H. Littlefield, Republican, was opposed by Horace A. Kimball, Democrat, and Albert C. How- ard, Republican and Prohibition, and failed to obtain a majority, though leading his Demo- cratic opponent by nearly 8000 and his Republican-Prohibition opponent by over 5000. The General Assembly elected Alfred H. Littlefield as Governor.
The Prohibition party, a distinct and separate organization thereafter and no longer a sometimes rebellious wing of the Republican party, seldom in the years that followed polled more than 2000 votes; it had become a minor party with a voting strength that dwindled steadily to less than 1000. Prohibition in Rhode Island was to experience one more flare, in which an amendment to the Constitution was to be tried as a measure for curbing the traffic in and consumption of alcoholic beverages. Meanwhile, in 1884, instruction in physiology and hygiene with emphasis upon the effects of alcoholic beverages and narcotic drugs upon the human system, was made part of the required course of study in public schools as a pro- ject for teaching temperance to the rising generation.
Other effective influences at work in the cause of temperance were the Father Mathew temperance societies and "total abstinence" unions organized in connection with almost every Roman Catholic church in Rhode Island, as the pastors of these churches endeavored to curb drinking and thus to improve the social and economic conditions of their parishioners. The long list of these temperance societies chartered by the General Assembly begins almost as early as the building of the first Catholic church in Rhode Island. For youth of the rising generation military companies of temperance cadets were organized in the same parishes. To this period also belongs the founding of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union, an aggres- sive organization in opposition to the traffic in alcohol. There were, besides, many public spirited citizens who wished well for the cause of temperance, some of whom unhesitatingly supported prohibition and others of whom were puzzled at finding the most effective remedy for intemperance, with the choice for the time being lying between bone dry prohibition and effective regulation through a rigid licensing law.
A resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution, to read "The manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquor to be used as a beverage shall be prohibited. The General Assembly shall provide by law for carrying this article into effect," was passed in the General Assembly on March 17, 1885, approved by the following Assembly, and by the electors on April 7, 1886, the vote being 15,113 to 9230, or 500 more than the sixty per cent. majority required. Gov- ernor Augustus O. Bourn, discussing in his message to the General Assembly in 1884 the need for more effective measures for enforcement of law, recommended the appointment of
652
RHODE ISLAND-THREE CENTURIES OF DEMOCRACY
an additional officer, "whose jurisdiction should be the whole state and whose duties should be similar to those now required of the state police. He might be called the 'high sheriff' or the 'state sheriff.'" The Governor renewed his recommendation in 1885, saying: "We have a state police established by law,* but it is entirely without responsibility to anyone for the faithful performance of duty. There should be some responsible head to the police, whose duty it should be to take care that the laws of the state be faithfully executed. He should have the power to enforce the performance of the duties required of the state police by law."
The General Assembly, in May, 1886, following the adoption of the prohibitory amend- ment, created the office of Chief of State Police,t and elected General Charles R. Brayton as Chief. General Brayton was succeeded on May 28, 1887, by Edward F. Curtis. Otherwise the state police under the direction of the Chief of State Police consisted of county sheriffs and their deputies, constables and town chiefs of police. The Assembly also, in pursuance of the prohibitory amendment requiring it "to provide by law for carrying this article into effect," enacted a bone dry prohibition law, forbidding manufacture and sale of alcoholic beverages except for "artistic, mechanical and medical purposes." At the January session, 1887, another statute was passed that defined the alcoholic content of beverages prohibited and permitted, and authorized sales of beverages containing not more than two per cent. of alcohol. An attempt to test the constitutionality of the amendment in the courts of Rhode Island was unsuccessful. The action was in equity and the process a bill of discovery to determine the legality of 2400 ballots alleged to have been cast in the election by voters whose eligibility was questioned. The court dismissed the bill on the general ground that a bill of discovery could not be allowed if and when it sought information, which, if established, would not give the relator an equitable remedy. Substantially the court's decision rested on the principle that a judicial court will not review a political question, the court having taken judicial notice of the Governor's proclamation that the amendment had been ratified. The courts of Rhode Island were busy immediately with a series of cases in which various phases of the prohibitory law were tested.§ additional to cases brought by enforcing officers in which the legal provision was clear. Rhode Island was not satisfied with a constitutional prohibition, whether the failure to satisfy be charged to impossibility of enforcement or unwillingness to enforce. The Gov- ernor in a message to the General Assembly said that the Chief of State Police faced difficulty because "the law is not more efficient, and it is sadly inefficient," and "for want of sufficient public sentiment to support it. It is a thankless task to attempt to enforce a law which has not the hearty moral support of the community to sustain it." General Brayton in his first report as Chief of State Police mentioned want of cooperation, and specifically that the federal internal revenue department, district of Rhode Island, had refused to furnish a list of persons in Rhode Island paying federal taxes on liquors. His successor, while not making specific charges, classified members of the state police, particularly town officers, with reference to effort at enforcement. In one of his reports he accused the chief of police of Providence of refusing to raid certain places in which it was alleged that liquor was sold unless the state chief furnished evidence to prove the raids warranted, a position on the part of the city chief that might be warranted on the general ground that the state officer was not legally his respon- sible superior. The enforcement of law continued to become more and more inefficient.
Rhode Island repealed constitutional prohibition on June 20, 1889, by a vote of 28,315 to 9956. A plausible suggestion that repeal was favored by the extension of suffrage under the Bourn amendment, 1888, fails to explain the discrepancy between 15,113 votes for pro-
*Consisting of sheriffs, constables and town police.
+Part of the "May deal"-infra.
#Hanley vs. Wetmore-15 R. I. 386.
§ State vs. Clark, 15 R. I. 383 ; State vs. Tonks, 15 R. I. 385 ; State vs. Kane, 15 R. I. 395 ; State vs. Dug- gan, 15 R. I. 403, State vs. Duggan, 15 R. I. 412 ; State vs. Murphy, 15 R. I. 543 ; In re Liquors of John E. McSoley, 15 R. I. 608 ; Barron vs. Arnold, 16 R. I. 22.
653
IDEALS AND STATE POLITICS
hibition in 1886, and only 9956 for it in 1889. The loss of 5000 votes in three years is prag- matic evidence of dissatisfaction. The increase in the vote for license from 9230 in 1886 to 28,315 in 1889 may be explained in part as due to new voters, although it is scarcely con- ceivable that a new class of voters should be substantially unanimous on a question which had been thoroughly discussed in their community. The General Assembly at a special ses- sion called immediately after repeal of the prohibitory amendment enacted a local option license law, and abolished the office of Chief of State Police. The new statute required an annual referendum on the question of granting or refusing licenses, and fixed a standard license fee that relatively made this legislation a high license law.
Though modified in detail from time to time, the legislation of 1889 remained in opera- tion until the prohibitory amendment to the Constitution of the United States became effec- tive. Rhode Island did not ratify the eighteenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The Attorney General of Rhode Island carried to the Supreme Court of the United States a petition for the purpose of testing the constitutionality of the federal amendment. The petition was dismissed on the general ground that the matter had not been brought before the court in a form that established jurisdiction. In a referendum on prohibition ordered by the General Assembly in 1930, the people of Rhode Island voted overwhelmingly (seven to two) for the repeal of the eighteenth amendment.
CHILDREN OF IMMIGRANTS IN POLITICS-Governor Van Zandt's declaration, in 1877, that "the balance of political power is passing into the hands of our illiterate classes, who will become by force of circumstances a caste by themselves through whose barriers it will be found well nigh impossible to break," was in error principally in the application of the adjec- tive "illiterate." He had failed to differentiate betwixt (I) the immigrant, who might be illiterate and who rarely under the Rhode Island system achieved political citizenship; and (2) the American-born children of the immigrant, who rarely were illiterate and who could qualify for suffrage by registration. As a matter of fact, a discriminating analysis of sta- tistics of illiteracy in Rhode Island at the period, 1870-1880, reveals that the marked increase in illiteracy was due to immigration and immigrants, and that the number of native-born Rhode Islanders who were illiterate was steadily decreasing.
Another factor neglected, or perhaps it should be said, not mentioned by the Governor, was the number of native-born sons of aliens who had passed through the public schools into colleges and professional training schools-many had taken advantage of the free state scholarships at Brown University under the Morrill Act-and who were already entering and achieving success in the learned professions in Rhode Island; among these the lawyers were finding their way into the General Assembly and other public service, and were gaining experience in actual political life that would make them most effective leaders in a movement for extension of suffrage and other changes in the Rhode Island system. In the courts these young lawyers were raising ingenious questions testing the Constitution and other phases of law, and in practice were establishing procedure that was neglectful of tradition. Besides these, there were also lawyers of comparatively ancient Rhode Island lineage who had inher- ited ideals of liberal democracy and who were not satisfied that restricted suffrage was the best solution of the Rhode Island problem, which was ultimately the assimilation of a mass of immigrants and their children without sacrificing too much of the old order that had made Rhode Island democracy distinctive. There were politicians, too, otherwise soldiers of for- tune politically, who sought advantage for themselves either in the fortress of rock-bound conservatism or in the camps pitched by the challengers to battle. Governor Van Zandt had won an election in 1877 in which the Democratic party had demonstrated strength not equalled since before the Civil War.
654
RHODE ISLAND-THREE CENTURIES OF DEMOCRACY
This new, vigorous, militant Democratic party could be disciplined, and moulded into a majority party if it could incorporate into its own ranks the forces seeking modification of prevailing restrictions, that is, if it could establish itself as the reform party in Rhode Island. Issues were not clearly defined in 1877; the campaign was personal, and the Democratic standard bearer, J. B. Barnaby, was not a reformer. The Democratic party was not the reform party then ; neither was the Republican party the conservative party.
The report of the Assembly committee of 1882 on constitutional measures, principally the writing of Republican members of the General Assembly, and the referendum in 1882 on the question of amending the Constitution in such manner as to authorize the calling of constitu- tional conventions, were not merely graceful gestures by the Republican majority. The report was an excellent state paper, the frankness and fairness of which rebut inference of other than a purpose to let the people decide the issue in the manner provided for in the Constitu- tion. Besides that, it should be remembered that proposed amendments submitted to the people in other years had first been approved by two successive General Assemblies controlled by Republicans.
THE SPRAGUE CAMPAIGN OF 1883-The second flood tide of the Democratic party, in 1883, was achieved in spite of a division within its own ranks ; it may be attributed to the per- sonal popularity and effective political methods of William Sprague, who, as a candidate for Governor, was seeking a "vindication" by his fellow citizens. Thrice elected as Governor in 1860, 1861 and 1862, and twice elected as United States Senator, in 1862 and 1868, the dis- astrous failure of the A. & W. Sprague Company, in 1873, had removed him from politics for the time being. If Governor Sprague had not been a Republican, Senator Sprague had not been a Democrat, certainly until he announced his withdrawal from the Republican caucus in the United States Senate, alleging that he could not bind himself in caucus to vote contrary to his convictions. Even before his business failure Senator Sprague had developed strong opinions in conflict with the financial policy of the national Republican majority in Congress, had complained of and denounced an alleged combination of bankers to control the money market, and had favored generally the position of the Greenback party. Retired from Con- gress by expiration of term in 1875, he was nominated for Governor in 1883 by a convention styling itself Democratic; later in the campaign another Democratic convention nominated Charles R. Cutler as its candidate for Governor.
The Sprague campaign was principally personal, although Sprague promised political reform as part of a program planned to "vindicate" him and punish his enemies. The latter, he alleged, included Zechariah Chafee, assignee of the A. & W. Sprague Company, whom Sprague accused of maladministration and purposeful waste; the Union Company, a corporation con- sisting in part of creditors of the Sprague Company, which had purchased the assets of the company, as it was alleged by them, to prevent larger losses through forced sales, although Sprague termed it a conspiracy to deprive him permanently of his properties; certain justices of the Supreme Court, whose decisions had been hostile to Sprague in the long litigation that followed the assignment, who were to be removed by the General Assembly if Sprague suc- ceeded ; the "Providence Journal," a persistent if not always a consistent opponent of the Sprague family in politics. The campaign was bitter, and at the end there were accusations by both of the principal contending parties that bribery had been resorted to. General Benja- min F. Butler, who was Democratic Governor of Massachusetts in 1883, and who had been of counsel for Sprague in much of the litigation attending the assignment, came to Rhode Island to address a mass meeting. The "Journal" ridiculed Butler's squinting eyes, and his reference to Chafee as "Chaffy." The Republican state ticket, headed by Augustus O. Bourn, of Bristol, was successful; it included also Oscar J. Rathbun, Joshua M. Addeman,
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.