CANADA'S New Party. 
 
 v-'/n^; 
 
 . i.^ 
 
 ^r* -.'f^f ; ,i; =r''i.4 
 
 f:'-M'\r-<: 
 
 5*' 
 
 '■i'-' . ■'•"n;-'- 
 
 Si:-Ht^^ 
 
 \^' 
 
 
 i« -vv ■> . 
 
 ■ ' > 
 
 : ; - / ■ ; ',U V ;v/ 
 
 s-jh-.:M--. 
 
 : 
 
 -.- «4 Mi_ r • :^ ■ l :■: 
 
 iU -!> :. 
 
 
 ■'.-.V, ^V'l':^- - 
 
 H'T'^ -'■■■<' 
 
 <■ 
 
 ■1 ;;f.-t;?-:t,.--rf:. 
 
 ■Hi r;'-: ■; 
 
 ; . ■-. 
 
 : ?xn^v>:,w"V-, •:■ 
 
 
 
 
 PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS 
 
 At the Inaugural Meeting, March 2z, 1888. 
 
 Allow me, in the first place, a word or 
 two in regard to my presence here, and the 
 somewhat active part I am taking in this 
 movement. There is a prevailing opinion 
 that ministers should have nothing to do 
 with politics ; and if by the word ' ' politics " 
 is meant only the questionable methods and 
 bitter strifes that characterize party con- 
 tests in this country, there is a good deal to 
 be said in favor of the opinion. But the 
 word has a far better and higher meaning. 
 Rightly understood it comprehends the 
 sacred trust of citizenship, as well as the' 
 grave duties and responsibilities of states- 
 manship. Understood in that sense there are 
 few subjects which better deserve the atten- 
 tion of Christian men andChristian ministers. 
 Moreover I reason in this way : If the poli- 
 tical methods of the day arc right, 1 am 
 bound to do all I can to support them ; if 
 they are wrong, I am equally bound to do 
 all I can to oppose or to reform them. 
 When I became a minister I did not sur- 
 render the rights of citizenship, nor could I, 
 if I would, evade its responsibilities. But 
 if I am to exercise those rights with a clear 
 conscience I must be free to protest against 
 what I believe to be wrong, as well as to 
 advocate what is right. Now I believe that 
 the political methods of the day need to be 
 radically reformed. Party has degenerated 
 into factiou : conscience is in bondage to 
 party ends ; principle is subordinated to 
 expediency ; and instead of appeals to a 
 lofty patriotinm, we have unblushing bribes 
 iOflbrtid to cupidity and ambition. I believe, 
 further, that these evils can be remedied, 
 bnt that this necessitatea a breaking up of 
 
 old party lines, and a re-adjustment of poli- 
 tical forces on the basis of a platform that 
 makes for righteousness. It is for these 
 reasons I am liere to give what aid I can to 
 a movement which aims to uplift our poli- 
 tical life to a higher plane; to cultivate an 
 unselfish patriotism ; to base the country's 
 suff"rage on manhood and not on money ; to 
 admit woman to her rightful share in shap- 
 ing the destinies of the nation ; to protect 
 our homes from the ravages of intemperance 
 by striking at the very root of the evil ; to 
 defend our liberties from the tyranny of fac 
 tion, and our country's resources from the 
 greed of monopolies ; to elevate our civil 
 service above the level of mere party spoils, 
 and to plant all our institutions upon the 
 foundations of that righteoi;sness that ox- 
 alteth a nation. If there is one person here 
 or elsewhere who can show cause why such 
 results should not be aimed at, or why 
 Christian ministers should not help to secure 
 them, let him proclaim his reasons in the 
 light of the sun. 
 
 Now in regard to the p'atform itself, it 
 cannot be denied that the very first plank 
 will be a stumbling-block to some. If the 
 secret thought were honestly uttered some 
 men would say, " What have righteousness 
 and truth to do with politics ? '' But does 
 not the question itself show the necessity of 
 a radical reform in our political methods? 
 If it be BO that righteousness an<l truth have 
 been divorced from political life, let us know 
 why and wherefore. If their union is in- 
 compatible, let us know the reason. EUght* 
 eousness aiitltruth ar j moral qualities. Tliey 
 dwell not in things but in men. If they 
 
find place iu any human system, it is because 
 nrien have put them there. If they are ^^t 
 found there, it is because men have ruied 
 them out. If they have been nded out of 
 Canadian politics, it is the business of all 
 good men to rule them in again if they can, 
 and this can be done only by putting in the 
 forefront of public life men to whom right- 
 eousness and truth are more than party shib- 
 boleths. To say that this caimot be done is 
 to say that the country must be ruled by 
 unscrupulous men, a conclusion I am by no 
 means willing to admit. We must try to 
 arouse the people from the tacit belief which, 
 like a horrid nightmare, has paralyzed their 
 energies, that politics are essentially evil, 
 tmd that any effort to purify them is but 
 wasted labor. We can have all the right- 
 eousness and truth in public affairs that we 
 are willing to put into them ; but if these 
 are to be permanent factors, we must take 
 good heed to the last clause in the plank — 
 " no compromise with wrong." Neglect of 
 this principle has caused all the mischief of 
 the past, and reduced Canadian politics to 
 the moral chaos in which we find them to- 
 day. It has been by compromising with 
 wrong, in order to win party victories, that 
 good men have consented to exclude right- 
 eousness and truth from politics, and have 
 reduced their own influence in public affairs 
 to a feeble minimum. 
 
 ^ I shall not detain you by a review of the 
 various planks in this platform ; there will 
 be time enough for that hereafter ; but I 
 call your attention to the fact that the whole 
 platform has its foundation in great moral 
 and political principles, while specific ques- 
 tions have been restricted to those of greatest 
 practical interest to the country at the 
 present time. And therefore in asking you 
 to come upon this platform you are asked 
 to rally around principles, not around men 
 — principles as immutable as truth itself, 
 and good for all times and all circumstances. 
 As other questions arise from time to time, 
 we can deal with them ; but we want, first 
 of all, to settle those which touch most 
 directly the welfare of the people. It is for 
 this reason that prohibition is placed in the 
 front, and there we intend to keep it. When 
 that is settled other questions will have their 
 turn. 
 
 But now comes the question, can we have 
 three or more parties as permanent factors 
 in Canadian politica? I answer, No I for the 
 simple reason that while most questions 
 have two sides, very few have three, and 
 hence when iMuea are joined people natur- 
 ally fall into position for or kgamst, and 
 the result ii two parties, not three. But 
 
 in free commonwealths it sometimes happens 
 that on great questions of reform both parties 
 get on the wrong side, and this is notoriously 
 the case in Canada at the present time. 
 Such a state of affairs necessitates a re-ad- 
 justment which can be accomplished only by 
 the creation of a new party with a definite 
 j»olicy. While the process of re-adjustment 
 is going on there will be three parties for a 
 time, but only for a time. As the new party 
 grows it will draw to itself the best elements 
 of the old parties, the men who believe in 
 truth and righteousness, the men who believe 
 that it is vastly more important that great 
 reforms should be carried than that p- par- 
 ticular party should hold the reins ; while 
 those who put party before country, who 
 defend abuses, who burden the people with 
 unnecessary or unjust taxation, who oppose 
 urgently needed reforms for fear of losing 
 votes, will naturally range themselves on the 
 other side ; and so it will become once more 
 the old yet ever new conflict between truth 
 and falsehood, between right and wrong, 
 carried on with what seems at times a doubt- 
 ful issue ; but in the long run truth and 
 right gain the day^ and the cause of human 
 progress gets nearer to high water mark 
 than ever before. 
 
 Such a period of re-adjustment is now 
 upon us, and the need for it is great. The 
 old parties have outlived their usefulness. 
 Judged by what appears on the surface, 
 they have neither principles nor policy, end 
 their chief employment is to wrangle inter- 
 minably over the most trifling questions, 
 and swing their party shillelahs in faction 
 fights. The rallying cry is not — " Where- 
 ever you see a just principle, contend for 
 it," but, "Wherever you see a head of the 
 opposite party, hit it." So long as the pre- 
 sent parties remam in undisturbed posses- 
 sion of the field, things will he no better. 
 Remonstrances are useless. The only thing 
 that will bring the party leaders to their 
 senses is independent political action. In a 
 struggle like this one independent ballot is 
 worth a hundred arguments of any other 
 kind. 
 
 There are many reasons which justify the 
 formation of a new party. I will touch 
 briefly upon two or three. The first is, that 
 there is no hope of obtaining necessary re- 
 forms from either of the existing parties. 
 The history of the last twenty years shows 
 most conclusively that with tJiem the great 
 consideration has been ' ' Party first ; let the 
 country take care of itself." Recalling that 
 history, one is utterly astounded at the enor* 
 mouB waste of time and of public money, 
 and at the very sniall amount of useful Ugia- 
 
3 
 
 lation that has been put upon the statute 
 book. There is only one thing which is 
 more surprising, and that is, that the people, 
 blinded by party prejudice and by the dust 
 so plentifully thrown in their eyes, have 
 submitted so long and so tamely to all this 
 folly. During all this time, most important 
 questions have been shelved. Reforms have 
 been demanded in vain. To take one in- 
 stance, for years and years the people have 
 been saying to the existing parties, "Abolish 
 the liquor traffic ; " but the Conservatives say, 
 "We won't," and the Liberals say, "We 
 can't." There is but one remedy — let the 
 
 {)eople rise in their might and say to the 
 eaders of both parties: "If you can't or 
 won't, we both can and will, and if your old 
 parties stand in the way, so much the worse 
 for the parties, " The issue is upon us, and 
 we must meet it like men. We have spent 
 far too much time in feeble remonstrances 
 with the old parties, and a more vigorous 
 policy is demanded. 
 
 "We've had enough of license laws, ' 
 
 Enough of liquor's taxes ; 
 We've turned the grindstone long enough, 
 
 'Tie time to swing our axes. 
 This deadly upas-tree must fall, 
 
 Let strokes be strong and steady ; 
 Pull up th« stumpb I Grub out the roots 1 
 
 0, brothers, are you ready ? 
 
 **No longer will we shield this foe 
 
 To manhood, love and beauty ; 
 We've had enough of compromise, 
 
 The right alone is duty ; 
 Enough of weak men and distrust, " 
 
 The burden grows by shifting ; 
 Let's put our shoulder to the wheel 
 
 And do our share of lifting. 
 
 ** We've had enough of forging chains 
 
 This demon drink to fetter ; 
 Good bullets from the ballot-box, 
 
 Well sped, will fix him better. 
 We've had enough of license laws, 
 
 Enough of liquor's taxes ; 
 We've turned the grindstone long enough, 
 
 'Tis time to swing our axes. " 
 
 A second reason is, that it is useless to 
 expect such a compromise between the pre- 
 sent parties aa will secure the legislation we 
 seek. Both parties, as parties, have put 
 themselves squarely against prohibition ; 
 and while thei-e »re members on both sides 
 of the House who are decided temperance 
 men and friends of prohibition, yet tney are 
 hampered by party considerations whidi 
 
 neutralize their influence. A striking illus- 
 tration of this occurred at the present session 
 of the Commons. On a motion to go into- 
 committee of supply, an amendment waa 
 sprung upon the House, touching the 
 duty of the (Government to make the Scott 
 Act and its amendments a Government mea- 
 sure. At almost any other time, such a 
 motion would have done good, and would 
 have commanded support from })oth sides of 
 the House, but as an amendment to a motion 
 to go into Committee of Supply, it was re- 
 garded as tantamount to a vote of want of 
 confidence. Instantly, every supporter of 
 the Government took the alarm, and the 
 amendment was voted down by what was 
 virtually a straight party vote. All the 
 circumstances made it plain that the amend - 
 nient was not designed to help the temper- 
 ance cause, but to embarrass the Government, 
 and to make it appear as if all the friends of 
 temperance were in the ranks of the Opposi- 
 tion. And this makes clear another point, 
 viz. , that neither party will hesitate, when 
 occasion serves, to use the temperance ques- 
 tion as a convenient catspaw to pull their 
 party chestnuts out of the fire. 
 
 And as a compromise between parties in 
 the House is impracticable, so it is imprac- 
 ticable in the Constituencies. This has 
 been tried, and it has failed. In muni- 
 cipal matters good has been accomplished 
 by the union of temperance men of both 
 parties, but that is simply because, in 
 many places, the party element does not 
 enter into municipal contests. But in pro- 
 vincial or Dominion elections, party is the 
 dominating factor, and turna the scale. At 
 such times men say to us, and very justly, 
 " You ask me to withdraw from my own. 
 party and turn my back upon life-long poli- 
 tical friends, but only that I may vote with 
 a party to which I have always been opposed, 
 and whose record, as a party, on the temper- 
 ance question, is no better than that of the 
 party to which I now belong." Tho implied 
 argument is hard to answer. It is unrea- 
 sonable to ask a man to come out of the 
 Eden of his own party to become a political 
 "wanderer and vagabond" on the face of the 
 earth. We must be prepared to show him 
 that when he leaves his old party for con- 
 Gcience' sake, there is another and a better 
 party into which he can enter ; and this 
 is what we hope to accomplish by organiz- 
 ing a party on the platform which is now 
 before you. 
 
 A third reason, the last I shall touch, is< 
 that histoi'y furnishes some striking examples- 
 of great reforms accomplishttl liy the re-ad- 
 justment of parties growing out of new 
 
movements similar to our own. In 1800, 
 both the Whigs and the Democrats in the 
 United States supported slavery. For forty 
 years many of the people preached and 
 talked and prayed against slavery, but 
 neutralized their prayers by voting for the 
 parties who defended the evil. In 1840 they 
 formed a new party, calling it the " Liberty 
 Party," which in the next Presidential con- 
 test received only some 7,000 votes. Four 
 years later the vote rose to 62,000. After 
 that a wing of the Democrats espoused the 
 principles of the Liberty party, and called 
 themselves " Freesoilers. " In 1848 these 
 two parties polled a vote of 291,000. In 
 1852 there was an apparent loss, but in 1856 
 the Liberty party and Whigs united under 
 the name of the Republican party, and 
 polled a vote of 1,341,000. The rising tide 
 reached high-water mark in 1860, when 
 A I aham Lincoln was elected and the doom 
 of slavery was sealed. 
 
 But the Republican party, which had de- 
 livered the nation from the curse of slavery, 
 refused to deliver it from the curse of rum, 
 and so in 1872 a Prohibition party was' 
 formed, and in four Presidential contests the 
 vote was as follows: 5,608, 9,522, 10,305 . 
 
 152,454 ! The last vote was for St John, 
 and is almost identical in numbers with the 
 vote given for the Liberty candidate in 1852, 
 eight years before Lincoln was elected. It 
 is confidently expected that a Prohibition 
 President will be elected in 1892. 
 
 And now, a word to prevent misapprehen- 
 sion. The formation of a new party does 
 not mean a split in the temperance ranks : 
 it only means that some of us, wearied with 
 a policy of "masterly inactivity," propose 
 to carry the war into Africa, and this un-* 
 avoidably takes us in advance of those who 
 still linger in the entrenchments of the old 
 parties. But we are confident that when the 
 roll of caimon and the rattle of small arms 
 tells that the battle has fairly begun, our 
 former comrades will not linger in the rear. 
 Instead of asking us to bring back the flag 
 they will bring up the men, and although they 
 could not see their way to volunteer for the 
 forlorn hope, we shall not grudge them their 
 full meed of praise when the MalakofF of the 
 rum power is taken. But before the hour 
 of victory comes there is much work to be 
 done, and it behooves every man who loves 
 his country to do his share. 
 
 Campaign Literature supplied at cost. Address — 
 
 W. MuNNS, Secretary, 
 
 PARKDALE, ONT.