Chapter XIII (1)

The friends of temperance in this State, after a long and earnest conflict, secured the passage of a Local Option law by a decided majority.

This law provided that on the call of a certain number of voters a special election should be held and a vote of the town be taken, for, or against license. At several points signal victories had been gained; the temperance women of the State giving active aid and sympathy to the cause. Sallie Hart, a young lady of San Francisco, of unusual ability and irreproachable character, was very active and efficient at the temperance meetings and at the polls. Her life was threatened, and she was warned to desist or suffer the consequences. But she was too heroic to quail before the enemies of her country and her race, and in the conflict that followed she came near losing her life. The very same class that has for years committed outrages on the Chinese would have torn her to pieces if it had not been for the courage and untiring efforts of the police, and a brave band of temperance men and order-loving citizens.

The first great victory was at Oakland. This city is one of the most beautiful places in California. It is situated just across the bay from San Francisco, and is embowered in flowers, and shaded with live oaks. These beautiful trees are always fresh and green. It had become a city of elegant residences, but the beer-trade was ruining it, property was depreciating, and the property-owners were almost unanimous in the desire to banish the drinking-saloons.

Oakland was the third city of the State. After doing all they could do preparatory for the contest, the women went to the polls and worked all day. Their methods were novel and taking. They had a large tent, where a free lunch was spread. Tea, coffee, and everything that was elegant and inviting were provided. Barrels of ice-water were at hand, so that no man should have an excuse to go to the drinking-saloon to quench his thirst.

Bushels of bouquets were in readiness, and ballots “_Against License_” in hand, and all who would accept the ballot got a bouquet and a pleasant “Thank you.”

The liquor men were confident that they would have a _large_ majority, but the ladies turned the tide, and a victory for temperance was gained.

A grand mass-meeting was held in their tent in the evening, and the temperance people and the property-owners of Oakland were jubilant. The Saturday following, the ladies went in force to Brooklyn, a neighboring town, and aided in gaining another victory. The work went on gloriously throughout the State.

Dr. Jewell, of Howard Street M. E. Church, San Francisco, preached a stirring sermon from the text: “Rise up, ye women that are at ease, hear my voice, ye careless daughters; give ear to my speech.” Isa. xxxii. 9; with a view to arouse the women for work in that city.

On the 2d of July, 1874, an election, under the provisions of the Local Option law, was held in the proverbially quiet town of Alameda, California.

I gather the following facts from well-authenticated accounts:

“During the day of the election, the place was invaded by an army of men from San Francisco, organized in the interests of liquor, who, by mob-violence, took possession of the streets and avenues to the polls, and committed the most outrageous insults to American citizenship, both to men and women, that have ever yet been known in all the history of the State.

“From the course pursued by the organized liquor interest in San Francisco, under whose auspices the outrages at Alameda seem to have been committed, it is evident that the liquor interests of our whole country have combined to resist _all_ law, social, moral, and civil, whenever and wherever such law interferes with their degrading business.

“The _facts_ of the Alameda outrages ought to be made known to every citizen of the State and the country. They show, as nothing else has ever shown, the animus and purpose of the ‘whiskey interest.’ Sensible, sober people, want to know the truth.”

The _Evening Post_ dared to publish the facts. It has exposed the falsehoods so widely circulated, and has denounced the outrage and the perpetrators in leading editorials of great force and merit.

THE REIGN OF TERROR INAUGURATED.

_The scene as described in the Chronicle and Post next day._

“Not far from the middle of the day, the train from San Francisco arrived and deposited upon the street one hundred and fifty members of the San Francisco German Saloon-Keepers’ Society, headed by the United States Fourth Artillery Band. Instantly it was seen that there was trouble ahead. The delegation was composed mostly of young and irresponsible men.

“They at once formed in line, and being joined by as many more already in the street, they started for the polling-place to the music of the band. When the procession dispersed, a large throng at once crowded on the corner near the polling-place. ‘Down with Sallie Hart!’ they shouted, and at the same time pressed in around her. Fortunately several powerful gentlemen happened to be near her, or she would inevitably have been crushed in the excited mass.

“‘Go home, you little red-head!’ ‘Get out of this, and go home!’ was the cry. The crowd pressed, and swore, and hooted, and yelled, and shrieked. ‘Down with her!’ ‘Drive her off the street!’ ‘Give her a kiss; that’s what she wants!’ ‘Don’t let her speak!’ In vain did the poor girl cry, ‘For shame, gentlemen!’ In vain did her few friends surge, and squeeze, and try to force an opening for retreat. In vain did the police shout and brandish their clubs. The crowd only hooted and howled their insults all the more. Finally, a narrow passage was made, and through it the girl was half-dragged into an adjoining store.”

Thence, after a few moments, she was escorted by a strong cordon of police and temperance men to the ladies’ tent. The crowd caught sight of her as she left the store, and at once surged and pressed around, their yells and gestures increasing each moment in violence. Slowly the young lady and her escorts made their way to the tent, unable to resent or stop the torrent of vile epithets which assailed them. Once inside, Sallie sat down almost exhausted, but the crowd were not satisfied. They yelled fiercely, “Take Sallie Hart home or we’ll tear down the tent!” “She shan’t stay here!” “Say, you old Gibson; take her home, do you mind, or we’ll kill her.” With these remarks, the vast throng shook their fists and swore they wouldn’t quit the spot until Sallie Hart and every other woman had promised that they would not again show their faces. The temperance men, headed by Dr. W. R. Gibbons, Dr. Densmore, Mr. Gibson, Mr. Hurlburt, and others, at once took measures to protect the tent and the ladies in it from violence. A strong force of police was instantly summoned, who drew a rope around the entrance and endeavored to keep the excited crowd outside.

One old lady of at least sixty years, with silver-gray hair, splendid black eyes, and a commanding figure, ventured out in the belief that her age and appearance would command an outward show of respect. She took a bundle of No License tickets and a small bouquet, and got as far as the street, near the polling-place. The hooting crowd made for her and she was surrounded in a twinkling. “Go home, old woman,” they shouted; “go home and mend your husband’s breeches!” Then followed a series of yells and groans and cat-calls, interspersed with cries of “Sour kraut,” “Limberger,” and “Go it, old granny!”

Whenever the old lady would open her lips to speak, she would be instantly set upon, and her voice completely drowned. But she held out bravely. Mounting a piazza, her great black eyes flashing with the rage of a pythoness, she hurled defiance at the jeering crowd and tried to shame it into decency. One man filled his cheeks with tobacco-smoke and blew it into her face. Another spat on her dress; a third trod on her feet, and all pushed and jostled her in a most unmanly way. Finally, when some one in the crowd hurled an atrociously obscene epithet at her, the old lady burst into tears and shrank away in disgust.

About half-past two o’clock a litter was rigged behind a building, a five-gallon demijohn placed on it, and alongside the demijohn was laid an effigy of Sallie Hart, dressed in black. In the mouth of the demijohn was stuck a stick, from which flew a black flag. The litter was lifted to the shoulders of a crowd of men with evergreens in their hats. An immense procession was formed, and preceded by the band playing the “Dead March in Saul,” it marched back and forth in front of the temperance tent, amid the hooting and jeering of the multitude. An effort was made at this time to drown the din by singing the Hallelujah chorus, but the effort was a lamentable failure. The funeral procession marched to a pile of sand near the tent, where, amid the waving of hats and hoarse cheers of the throng, the “body” of Miss Hart was prepared for interment. The litter was lowered to the ground, a hole dug, and then, strict silence being enjoined, Louis Kehlmeyer intoned _a burlesque of the Catholic burial “service.”_

The _Evening Post_, on the day after election, contained the following:

The brutal outrages perpetrated by German whiskey men, who went over to Alameda yesterday, and insulted, mobbed, and drove off ladies who had as much right there as themselves, will arouse a feeling of indignation in the heart of every right-thinking American citizen. California has always been noted for her chivalry to women, and every Californian’s face must burn that such an outrage has been perpetrated in a California town. Things have come to a pretty pass when a lot of vile brutes who have no respect for womanhood themselves, can publicly insult ladies in the grossest manner; compel them, under threats of violence, to get out of their way, and openly burlesque the most solemn ceremony of a Christian church.

Our laws, and the American sentiment, which is deeper than all laws, guarantee to every woman who conducts herself in an orderly and decent manner, immunity from insult and outrage. To the American mind there is in womanhood a sacred right and essential privilege, recognized even by the lowest and most brutal, which gives to every woman exemption from insult and outrage. This sentiment the brutal wretches who insulted and drove off the ladies at Alameda, yesterday, appeared to have defied with deliberate intention. How far the general association of liquor-dealers may have been responsible for it we do not know; but the German Liquor-Dealers’ Association, which went to Alameda in a body, and their fellows on the ground seem to have deliberately made up their minds to drive off the ladies by whatever stretch of brutality was necessary. One of the Germans had a double-barrelled gun, with which he marched in the procession, and several of them had pistols. One lady said that a man in the crowd spit upon her, and another that she had liquor thrown in her face. Another lady was seated in a buggy when the whiskey men marched past her with the black flag, which they placed over the grave that held Sallie Hart’s effigy; and one of them shook the flag in her face and said, “Death to temperance!”

Judge J. Russell said he had been in California, and had travelled a good deal in it, having roamed over the coast in early days, from this city to the mouth of the Columbia river, and visited many of the mining camps. He had never seen so rough a crowd as was present at Alameda. Mr. N. A. Hillyer said the obscenity was frightful.

“I took an old lady by force from the crowd, and put her into the barber’s shop for protection. I saw men poke sticks under the old lady’s dress and raise her clothes as she stood on a tea-box before the mob. I also saw the mob bury Sallie Hart in effigy, and the black flag rising above the grave. I heard profanity and obscenity from the mob. I have been in all kinds of society, in Catholic and Protestant lands, but I never heard anything like the profanity used on that occasion. A pistol was drawn on me for remonstrating against license.”

STATEMENT OF REV. O. GIBSON, OF SAN FRANCISCO.

At the Alameda election, from morning till night, the air was filled with profanity, obscenity, and the most outrageous insults to pure American womanhood--not by citizens of Alameda, but by the representatives of the “German Liquor-Dealers’ Association,” of San Francisco.

From twelve o’clock to three P. M. I remained in front of the temperance tent, aiding the friends in efforts to defend the women in the tent from being overrun and outraged by the howling mob which surrounded and threatened them. At three o’clock I passed, quietly and alone, to the office to send a telegram. On coming out of the office, I was at once surrounded by a large crowd, who seemed to be waiting to take the cars. My presence was the signal for howls, curses, and threats, such as: “Gibson, the old rooster, send him home.” “Go home, d--n you.” “You don’t vote right.” “We don’t want you here.” “We Germans be the most intelligence peoples.” “You Yankees be d--d fanatics,” and so on. I did not undertake to discuss the question with such a crowd. But they pressed upon me--one man from behind kicked me, another struck me, and then an effort was made to push me down. At last, the police succeeded in opening the crowd, and I passed out.

The crowd followed, howling, for the distance of one whole block; then the police succeeded in getting me into a store, and I passed through and escaped out of their hands.

On returning to San Francisco, per four o’clock boat from Oakland, attended by five other persons, some of whom had only been to Oakland on business, a party of the Alameda rioters followed us in the streets of this city, up as far as the post-office, with jeers and cat-calls, making such a demonstration as to call many people to the shop doors to see what was going on.

Mr. J. N. Webster, in the _Post_, of July 9th, says:

Mr. John Gunn, one of our best and most respected citizens, had his coat torn off his back because he dared to advocate the right.

Sallie Hart remained on the field, doing all the good she could, until there were _certain signs_ that they intended to kill her, when she was taken away.

William F. Kellett, in the _Post_, of July 12th, tells us:

At Alameda, on last Thursday, scenes were enacted which are absolutely unparalleled in the history of our elections, and with which the opinions of the parties therein had nothing whatever to do. Yet in some of the papers not a single word of censure has been uttered, while some have actually justified them. That murder was not committed was because the threatened did not dare to lift a hand, while other things were done which would almost have justified the death of the offender on the spot, and which I cannot name, however remotely.

AFFIDAVIT OF OFFICER KRAUTH.

I told the reporter about the crowd hooting and yelling, and trying to get into the ladies’ tent, and endeavoring to create a disturbance all the time, and trying to pick quarrels with the people and police. I told him that the rope around the tent was cut seven times, and gave him other information of a similar character. From the time the San Francisco crowd arrived, there was one continuous scene of disgraceful riot, until they left, late in the afternoon. I believe there were two trains of cars, with eight cars each, all filled with people, who came from San Francisco and Oakland; and we had but fifteen officers to try and preserve order. It was impossible to arrest anybody, owing to the crowd, and all that we could do was to prevent fighting. I have read the report of the occurrences at Alameda on the day of the local option election, as published in the _Post_, and it is substantially correct.

F. K. KRAUTH, JR.

Subscribed and sworn to before me, this 13th day of July, 1874.

SAMUEL S. MURFEY, Notary Public.

These outrages passed unpunished, and the whole liquor force rallied against the Local Option law. They were not willing that majorities should rule, but determined to force drink, against the express will of the people, upon them, and compel the protesting legal voters and tax-payers to submit to a depreciation of the value of their property, and support the paupers and criminals, the result of their traffic.

They therefore carried a case to the courts, and obtained a decision, that _the Local Option law was unconstitutional_. A wide-spread opinion prevailed at the time that the court was corrupted; but there was no redress. Nothing was left but to work, and pray, and wait, till the public sentiment was strong enough to master the rowdyism of society, and hurl from power the officials that truckle to the base demands of the liquor oligarchy.

OREGON.

I gather the following thrilling facts from a published account by Mrs. F. F. Victor:

A meeting was called at the Baptist Church, Tuesday, March 10th, to consider the methods used in the Crusade movement. From this time on, meetings were held daily, morning, noon, and night. The subject of temperance was discussed from every possible standpoint, and, after much thoughtfulness and prayer, the ladies decided to visit the saloons. The gentlemen organized a society to assist the ladies.

On the 17th of March, a printed appeal was sent to the liquor-dealers, copies of which, in large type, were posted around the city. The ministers of the town, Revs. Medbury, Baptist, Atkinson and Izer, Methodist, and Eaton, Congregationalist, by frequent and stirring addresses, and in every possible way, assisted the ladies.

The first visit to saloons was made in small companies, two and two, going quietly. In most of the places they were politely treated, Mr. Moffett being the exception. Two elderly ladies, mothers in Israel, called at his door to leave the dealers’ pledge, when the brutalizing influence of the liquor business upon those who sell was conspicuously exhibited. When they entered, Mr. Moffett, on the alert, without giving them time to announce their errand, seized them each rudely by an arm, and thrust them into the street, exclaiming, “Get out of this. I keep a respectable house, and don’t want any d--d wh--s here.”

Long and earnest prayers had given these women a preparation which Mr. Moffett had not calculated on. Mrs. Reed, one of the two thus insulted, turned and looked up over the door to ascertain what sort of a place, kept by what sort of a man, this might be, and the name struck her with horror.

“Walter Moffett!” she exclaimed. “Can this be Walter Moffett? Why, Walter Moffett, I used to know you; and I prayed with your wife for your safety, when you were at sea years ago!”

“I don’t want any of your d--d prayers; I want you to get out of this, and stay out. That’s all I want of you. I don’t keep a wh--e house.”

If any suppose it does not require an utter consecration to prepare pure-minded ladies to encounter such base and ruffianly assaults as these, they are in error; for the most patient and persistent laborers in this field are meek and quiet Christian women, who have seldom or never spoken aloud in their own churches; humble women who have never essayed to lead in anything, not even the fashions.

After this quiet canvass, the ladies visited the saloons in force. Often the saloons were closed against them, and they were compelled to hold their services on the street. This only brought them the larger audiences. Often, too, they were assailed by abusive language, and even roughly handled. This, too, opened the eyes of many to the brutalizing effects of drink, and led them to declare, that if that was what whiskey brought men to, they would never drink another drop.

At the Oregon Exchange very often, when a visit from the ladies was anticipated, some ridiculous or scandalous performance was gotten up, to divert them from their purpose; such as a man fantastically dressed, _a la_ negro minstrels, dancing, drinking from a bottle, etc. One of the worst places visited was kept by two women. With these the ladies felt they must succeed. On their second visit, as the ladies approached, one of the women flew in a rage to close the door; the other woman objected, and they were admitted. One of them was penitent, and listened tearfully to their words, and promised to lead a different life.

At one German saloon the proprietor rushed out when he saw the ladies coming, and swinging his arms and shaking his fists in the most excited manner, exclaimed: “Vot you vant here? You shust go vay! Get off mine sidevalk! Vat you come here so mooch, braying and singing, and making my license so pig? You shust go vay! I vill not haf it! Vat you vant? You make a church of mine house! Ruin mine pizness! No, no, you can do dat; you moost come here no more. You shust come here vonce more, you vill see vat I vill do mit you! My Piple says you moost not bray on de street corners, but you moost bray at home. You go home to bray.”

The band commenced singing a hymn, and the irate German retreated into his saloon. As they were passing on, he gazed after them as if horror-stricken:

“Vell if dere is not a burty young girl mit dose vimmen! Vot a shame!” Probably, he thought, a hurdy-gurdy house a better place for a “burty young girl” than “mit dose vimmen.”

At the more respectable houses they were treated with civility, and were allowed to hold services in the saloons and the billiard rooms, and no drinks were sold during their stay. But from the beginning of the Crusade, the opposition of the liquor-dealers, both wholesale and retail, was steady and united. Secret meetings were held from time to time to consider the most effectual means of combating the growing temperance sentiment. The loss of money and the loss of reputation was the burden of their complaint. What transpired in these secret sessions can only be judged by the plans they adopted publicly. It seemed to fall to Mr. Moffett’s share to try the effect of fire, water, and noise, in “abating the nuisance of prayer and singing.” On one occasion, when the ladies visited the Web Foot saloon, Mr. Moffett made such demonstrations as drew about them a great crowd of people and obstructed travel. This was just what he desired, as it gave him an excuse for calling in the police, who were ordered to disperse the crowd, meaning the women. One of the officers, acting on the instructions given him, began not only to order away the women, but laid violent hands on them, and, without respect to the gray hairs of some, pushed them rudely about, bruising the shoulder of one lady against the post of the awning.

As they were compelled to yield to force, without a word of remonstrance they started back toward the church. But one lady put her arm through the officer’s arm, and told him with much firmness, that if _she_ went, _he_ should go too! to which he was constrained to submit. The occasion was improved to the edification of that officer, who was met at the church and confronted, not with Crusaders only, but a goodly number of indignant friends.

The next day they were out as usual, and were arrested before the Web Foot saloon, and taken to the city jail, where they spent a couple of hours in prayer and song, to their own refreshment, and the delight of the other prisoners. Counsel was not lacking who volunteered to defend them. A special session of the court was called, Messrs. C. W. Parish and H. Y. Thompson appearing for the accused. After a hearing of the complaint, Judge Denny decided that there was no ordinance under which they could be held, saying, in substance, that had there been such an ordinance it would have been illegal, as the Constitution of the State of Oregon and of the United States permitted every person to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience.

The arrest of the ladies created, of course, a strong feeling of indignation in the community among their friends, and rejoicing among their enemies.

On the afternoon of the 16th of April, 1874, the Crusaders, sixteen in number, paid another visit to the Web Foot saloon. But no sooner had they appeared in front of his place, and asked permission to pray and sing there, than Mr. Moffett blew his policeman’s whistle, and by means of gongs, drums, hand-organs, etc., collected a large crowd which soon entirely surrounded them; in this situation they maintained their calmness and endeavored to carry on their devotional exercises. The noise of gongs and drums, tin cans and hand-organs, together with the murmurings and shoutings of the mob, was so great that they were not heard even by themselves. But still they sang and knelt in prayer, keeping a serene and joyous trust in God.

The scene which was then and there enacted rivalled pandemonium. Many of the friends of the ladies anxious for their safety hurried to the place, augmenting the crowd already collected, thereby increasing the apparent danger. A large proportion of those present were street idlers, some of them roughs and blackguards; but even the roughest, if not intoxicated, felt the course Mr. Moffett was taking to be uncalled-for and outrageous, and were disposed to fight in behalf of the women.

The ladies, on their part, could not be heard, even in remonstrance. To escape from the crowd would have been nearly impossible, if they had made the effort. But they did not make the effort. Their faith in the protection of God, and His very presence with them, never wavered. Although they could not communicate with each other, because of the roar and clamor of the mob, each one of them felt so firmly impressed with the sense of security in Divine assistance, that not one of them betrayed or felt any fear. Pistols and knives were drawn, furniture thrown about, and windows broken. One lady was struck by a tumbler thrown out of the saloon, and another had a pistol held at her head by Mr. Moffett himself.

This strange scene was prolonged from half-past two o’clock in the afternoon until six in the evening--until the gong-beaters, drummers, and organ-grinders had become exhausted, and the mob was weary of its own riotousness. When the way was cleared, the ladies took their leave, having endured for three and a half hours such things as would commonly have driven them mad with fright, or caused them to faint or go into convulsions. If there are those who do not believe in Divine interposition in certain cases, here is a problem for them to solve.

More than one man that day was convinced of his sins; and quite a number of drinking men declared themselves converted to temperance, simply by witnessing the depths of degradation to which the habit of selling liquor could bring a man.

The wife of an Irish drayman said to a friend of the Crusaders, “My husband is a drinking man, and many is the dollar he has spent at Moffett’s, but he says he will never buy another glass at that place.”

Among the children whom Mr. Moffett was trying to press into his service was a little son of one of the Crusaders. Being told to beat a drum, he took the sticks and threw them among the crowd. On being threatened with punishment if he did not recover them, he ran in among the crowd as if to look for the lost sticks, but instead made his way to his mother, who was kneeling in prayer, and remained by her side until she left the place.

It may be asked, what were the police doing all this time?

On the previous occasion Judge Denny had dismissed the complaint, so it seemed of little use to arrest the ladies, and they allowed Mr. Moffett to conduct his riot in his own fashion.

On the following morning they visited the saloons, and in due time appeared before Mr. Moffett’s; immediately a crowd was attracted to the spot in expectation that the scenes of the day before would be repeated. But they were disappointed. Mrs. Moffett was there with one of her children, and no disturbance was raised. She appealed to the ladies to leave her husband to his own ways; but was met by an eloquent counter-appeal by one of the band, whose father had perished by drink, and whose son, though carefully reared, was on the road to ruin from the same cause.

At half-past eleven, Chief-of-Police Lappens appeared, bearing a warrant, which, upon being shown to the ladies, they obeyed by accompanying him to the jail. An immense crowd followed to the very entrance of the building, to which the Crusaders gave no heed, but entered, singing,

“All hail the power of Jesus’ name.”

At one o’clock P. M., the court convened. The usual dock was filled with ladies as well as half the usual audience-room outside the bar. The charges against them were made by Mr. Moffett, for “wilfully and unlawfully conducting themselves in a disorderly and violent manner, by making a loud noise, and creating a disturbance whereby the peace and quiet of the said city was disturbed.” _Mr. Cronin_ was Mr. Moffett’s counsel, and Messrs. Parish, Northrop, and Shoup defended the ladies. This, as will be seen, was a charge made by Mr. Moffett himself, who had prepared for and conducted the riot himself, while the ladies stood as silent witnesses of the scene. Mr. Cronin opened the case. Mr. Gibbs responded. He said processions had marched through the town, blockading the streets; the gospel had been preached to listening crowds at the street corners; Chinamen had come out on the public thoroughfares, beating gongs, exploding fire-crackers, and making hideous noises; and for all this there never had been an arrest. It would be shown that if the peace and quiet of the city were disturbed, that they did not do it; that they broke nobody’s window, harmed no man, woman, or child, and that they were not responsible for the beating of gongs, or the sounding of trumpets, and the hooting and howling of disorderly men.

Moffett was the first witness. I can only give a part of his testimony. Being cross-examined, he said:

“There was a great crowd, probably a thousand persons, two or three fights took place, and a man was stabbed. At the time the disturbance was going on, the women sung very loud.”

“But did you see the defendants do anything?”

“They would not move when I asked them.”

“What were you doing?”

“Trying to keep the peace.” (Laughter.)

“Did you have a pistol to keep the peace with?”

“No, sir.”

“Now I ask you if you did not have a pistol in your hand at the time this occurrence took place?”

“Yes.”

“Then when you stated a while ago that you did not have a pistol, you did not state what was true?”

“I did not have it to keep the peace with, but for protection; they were stealing my property.”

This is a sample of Moffett’s testimony.

Allen Griffith testified for the defence, to having seen Moffett’s barkeeper, Good, throw water, by means of a hose, on the sidewalk, at the saloon, while the ladies were present; also saw Good in a row--saw him close to the ladies.

Mr. Shoup.--What was he doing at that time?

Witness.--One of the times when he was particularly near to them he was holding a gong within a few inches of a lady’s ear, and beating it very loudly. I saw him lift her veil at one time.

C. H. Williams spoke of having been attracted to Moffett’s saloon, April 16th, by the noise of gongs and drum-beating.

Mr. Cronin (Moffett’s attorney).--Was your wife among the ladies that day?

Witness.--She was not; I only wish she had been.

Mr. Cronin asked Thomas A. Royal, of the Portland Academy, another witness, if he had counselled the women not to go to Moffett’s saloon.

He answered: “I have not, but I have asked my wife to go.”

This, though a small part of the testimony, will show the drift of the trial, which lasted four days. The testimony was clear as to the pure moral character and good behavior of the women; the speeches for the defence of the women were able. The case was one of the clearest that ever went before an American jury.

Judge Denny briefly charged the jury, reminding them that all they were called upon to decide, from the evidence, was, whether the defendants were guilty, as charged in the complaint, of wilfully and unlawfully making a loud noise, whereby the peace and quiet of the city was disturbed. They were also advised that it would be their duty to give the prisoners the benefit of any reasonable doubt. The jury was out several hours, but returned with a verdict of “guilty,” but recommended to the merciful consideration of the court. Upon the request of Mr. Parrish, the judge consented to stay sentence till the next morning, to give defendants time to file a motion to arrest judgment. The motion to arrest judgment being overruled, the ladies presented the following protest:

“_Your Honor_: We do protest against any sentence being passed upon us, for the following reasons:

“1. That the verdict was contrary to the testimony, and to the charge of your honor, in that the testimony clearly shows, by numerous witnesses, that we were quiet and orderly in the midst of disorder and confusion. To such an extent did some of us preserve quiet, that we did not so much as open our mouths, either in song or in prayer, as your honor will observe by referring to the testimony.

“2. We, as temperance women, do earnestly protest against being sentenced on the finding of a jury composed in part of liquor-dealers, who, according to the words of their oath, had already prejudged us.

“If we may be allowed to mention the work in which we are engaged, we should like to do so. The crime being supposed to be in the intent, we would remind your honor that the husbands and fathers of the land are being stricken down on every side by this vile traffic against which we wage war, and that the sons of the land are so beset by temptation that very many of them fall early into a drunkard’s grave, and many more who live on, but live to disappoint the fond hopes which are centred in them, and which, but for this fell destroyer, they might fulfil. These evils, your honor, are not in far-off lands, but at our own doors, as that wife can testify, who a few months since went to a prominent saloon in this city and plead with the proprietor to sell her husband no more liquor, as her life was in danger whenever that husband came home under its influence, and she was coldly told: ‘O, well, if I do not sell him liquor some one else will.’ Of that other wife whose twenty years’ experience has deprived her of everything the heart holds dear, ‘but her trust in God,’ whose husband can go and keep the books at this same saloon, and Saturday night take his pay in this cursed fire-water, and go to his home to make it such a hell upon earth that the children must be sent from the house and the wife remain in terror of her life. Such instances are not rare; and it is in behalf of these suffering sisters that we act. We have not power to amend the laws; but since the day when woman was first at the sepulchre, it has been her conceded right to pray, and this right we claim as inalienably ours.

“The jury have kindly recommended us to mercy; we ask no mercy--we demand JUSTICE.”

THE LOGICAL CONCLUSION.

The judge, with evident embarrassment, replied that the jury had been fairly and “impartially selected in accordance with law.” He also took occasion to advise the ladies not to attempt to overcome the evil they were warring against by such means as they had been using, but to go to the “fountain head.”

The penalty was five dollars fine each, or one day’s imprisonment. The ladies refused to pay the fine or allow the gentlemen present to pay it for them, electing to go to prison. They were shown to their common apartment in the jail, and gave up their only weapon, their Bibles. There was an indignation meeting in one of the churches that night, and between eight and nine o’clock, fearing the people, an officer came to the jail and rudely ordered them to leave. The ladies hesitated about going out into the darkness alone, expressing a preference to remain, to which he replied, “I’m boss here; you leave.” Thus thrust out, they made their way to the church. The first intimation the audience had of the release of the ladies was their presence in the church. Such enthusiastic cheering took place as had never been heard within those walls. When the tumult had subsided, some of the ladies made short addresses, in which they recounted the circumstances of their dismissal and their hesitating flight.

The Crusade work continued without any abatement of zeal. The liquor-dealers held meetings to devise means to protect their rights. Their doors were closed, and the women met with universal coldness and hardness. Mr. Moffett persisted in his open insults, treating the ladies with great personal indignity. At last forbearance gave way, and Mr. Moffett was arraigned for insulting conduct toward Mrs. H. B. Stitzel. The case was tried before Justice Ryan, with a jury of liquor-men. Mr. Moffett was discharged. Another complaint was entered by Mrs. Alice Fain, for assault, by making her ill by burning some poisonous substance in her face. In both these cases Mr. Moffett was defended by E. A. Cronin, who seemed to be inspired by the spirit of his employer, and grossly insulted the ladies by telling them, in his speech, that he believed they were as base and corrupt in heart “_as any woman in this town, no matter what her calling or character_.” The jury in this case, which was tried before Justice Crich, consisted of four liquor-men and two Germans. Moffett was again discharged.

An enthusiastic meeting of ladies was held, and able speeches were made, and published. The better class of citizens, and the Congregational Church, in council, gave the Crusaders their formal indorsement. In the meantime the usual work of visiting the saloons went on; petitions were circulated; and public sentiment thoroughly aroused.

On the 18th June, the mayor approved an ordinance, which had been secured mainly through their influence, raising the license from $50 to $100 per quarter, and requiring $1,000 bonds to keep orderly houses, with some other restrictions. This aroused the liquor-men to still greater opposition. One gentleman, whose wife was connected with the Crusade, was notified to take his wife off the street or suffer the loss of his business, through the enmity of the liquor association. “Very well,” he replied, “it took a higher power than I to place her on the street, and it will require a higher power to remove her. If you want to ruin my business, you can try it. I will certainly fight yours as long as I live.”

But they had many kind words, and much to encourage them in their difficult work. Mrs. A. C. Gibbs arose in a ladies’ meeting one day, and told the Crusaders, for their encouragement, that during a visit to Puget Sound, from which she had just returned, she had learned, to her surprise, that the temperance movement had produced the best effects over there. In a conversation between the captain of a Sound steamer, and other gentlemen, it was asserted that the liquor traffic had fallen off one-third; that he knew it by the less amount he carried on his boat. Also, that whereas all the men on his vessel used to take their grog, none of them did so now; and that a drinking-stand, kept on one of the wharves for the express convenience of this class of men, which used to make a profit of twenty-seven dollars a day, dwindled in its receipts to three dollars, and finally closed. Such a fact was certainly encouraging, as a result of four months of labor, no matter how arduous.

MURDER IN A SALOON.

On the Saturday evening immediately preceding the city election, at nine o’clock, a certain lady was reciting to the audience at the church an incident that came under her notice four years previous, of a woman’s shooting a man in a Portland saloon because he failed to vote as he was instructed, after having been furnished free drinks for a month at her place.

Almost at that very moment, a murder was being perpetrated in a place of similar character, but under somewhat different circumstances. In this case the woman had only given the murderer drugged liquor enough to make him either stupid or crazy. Unfortunately it had the latter effect, and to save herself from his pistol she had called on the police, and officer Schoppe entering at the moment when the deadly instrument was raised, was instantly shot fatally, and fell.

Here was a pointed example, if such were wanting, of the criminality of the saloon business. It _might_ be made use of to influence the election on Monday. But it was not; because it happened late Saturday evening, and on Sunday, at one o’clock, the man was buried out of sight!

THE ORDINANCE AGAIN.

When the new councilmen came in they found the ordinance increasing liquor licenses signed by the mayor, and ready to go into effect with the commencement of the quarter beginning July 1st. An effort was immediately made to get an ordinance passed reducing licenses to their former rates; but this was prevented by the mayor, two of the old councilmen and one of the new.

Then followed a petition from fifty-six liquor-sellers and eighty-seven others, to have licenses reduced to fifty dollars per quarter, and such pressure brought to bear upon the council that the mayor notified the temperance people that unless they sent in a counter-petition, the council might not be able to withstand it.

Accordingly a counter-petition was circulated, and one hundred and thirty names obtained, of the heaviest tax-payers in the city, who were _not_ liquor-dealers. Both petitions went before the council. That same evening an ordinance was passed and approved by the mayor, reducing licenses to fifty dollars! It contained, it is true, some provision for bonds being given; but how soon may we look to see even that repealed?

What is this power of whiskey that makes men disregard everything else?

An attempt was made to pass a law against singing and praying in the street, but it was not successful. The council did, however, ordain that no drinking-houses should be kept by women. I add the names of the noble women of Portland, who consecrated themselves to this work, and pursued it so successfully, notwithstanding the apathy of the masses, the corruption of the courts, and the ruffianism of the saloon-keepers:

Mrs. M. A. Mitchell; Mrs. Helen Sparrow; Mrs. J. H. Reid; Mrs. Jane Pierpont; Mrs. J. S. Briggs; Mrs. Josephine Ritter; Mrs. A. R. Medbury; Mrs. Catherine Sparks; Mrs. Mary C. Holman; Mrs. M. Quackenbush; Mrs. G. Shindler; Mrs. Maggie Wilson; Mrs. Charlotte Jean; Mrs. S. D. Francis; Mrs. H. V. Stitzel; Mrs. Rachel Clark; Mrs. L. F. Turner; Mrs. M. E. Sutherland; Mrs. E. C. Hall; Mrs. E. Watkins; Mrs. W. B. Fain; Mrs. E. O. Corson; Mrs. N. S. Swafford; Mrs. Dr. Atkinson; Mrs. G. W. Izer; Mrs. J. Smith; Mrs. T. F. Royal; Mrs. Lucy Patton; Mrs. J. F. Jones; Mrs. W. P. Jones; Mrs. E. Richards; Mrs. Kimberline; Mrs. Lillie; Mrs. J. R. Robb; Mrs. M. M. Smith; Mrs. Emma Morgan; Mrs. Murray; Mrs. Connell; Mrs. J. A. Robb; Mrs. L. L. Bond; Mrs. Lizzie Fletcher; Mrs. J. F. DeVore; Mrs. O. B. Gibson; Mrs. Dr. Sawtelle; Mrs. Wm. Roberts; Mrs. Benj. Thomas; Mrs. L. Blackstone; Mrs. A. Allen; Mrs. F. Pierce; Mrs. J. Stitzel; Mrs. A. Hurgren; Mrs. G. W. Traver; Mrs. Morris; Miss J. Pumphrey; Miss L. A. Mitchell; Miss Mary DeVore; Miss Orra Sparks; Miss Sarah Sparks; Miss Olive Padget; Miss Mary Harrington; Miss Mell Cranston; Miss Marion Francis; Miss Ida Francis; Miss Helena Holman; Miss Mary Test; Miss Eliza Richards; Miss Edith Sutherland.

NEW JERSEY.

The work in this State began in the city of Newark, April 16th, 1874.

Newark was the largest town in the State, and a stronghold of the liquor traffic. But the fire kindled there has spread from town to town, till the whole State rings with the watchword of the Woman’s Temperance Union--“_New Jersey for Christ and Temperance_.”

NEWARK, NEW JERSEY.

The call that brought the ladies together was anonymous; but though thus unexpectedly called to face the responsibility of the temperance work in a great, wicked city, they were too loyal to God and the cause to hesitate.

They prepared themselves for the work by a special and entire consecration, and waited before God for an open door, and the voice of command.

The work came to them in a most unexpected manner. At the close of one of their meetings, a forlorn, miserable-looking sort of a man came dragging his feet along just within the door, and tumbled into the chair that was near, being then somewhat under the influence of liquor. After sitting a few moments, he arose with some difficulty to his feet, and commenced speaking quite indistinctly, as if rather talking to himself. The first words that could be understood were, “I am a poor, miserable, lost, wretched and drunken engineer, and I am drunk now; do you think that I can be saved?” He then went on to tell of his dreadful life, how for over twenty years he had been drinking, ruining himself and family till he had become a worthless vagabond, and was lost and ruined both soul and body forever. While standing in a half-bent attitude describing himself and his wretched condition, in most piteous tones, the heart of every individual who had remained there was melted in sympathy. He said he did not know why he came into that room, or how he came there, but that a conviction of his guilt and ruin came over him the moment that he entered it, and while thus speaking, he commenced to sob and weep aloud, saying: “Will you pray for me?” Trembling and excited he got on his knees, and in the agony of despair he prayed that God would save him. Those who were there to pray were bowed low in the dust, as never before, conscious of the power and presence of the Holy Spirit, all remaining on their knees in prayer, till he yielded his heart to Jesus in penitence and tears, when he, a saved and sober man, testified to the riches of Divine grace which could reach and rescue even a great sinner like himself. And on that morning of the 8th of May, 1874, he left the hall, which he entered in such darkness and misery, with the light and peace in his soul which Jesus only can give. To His dear name be all the glory!

This small band, who continued to wait on the Lord, were enabled on that May morning to erect a signal of praise over this first marked and wonderful display of the marvellous power of God to save, and His readiness to hear and to grant an immediate answer to prayer.

Some of the very worst-looking men would most strangely find their way into that meeting without knowing how or why they came. Almost as soon as they entered and heard the voice of prayer, they would rise and ask to be prayed for as poor lost sinners, and continue in prayer till they found the Saviour. Others were invited or led in, even when intoxicated, and were eventually saved.

As the work progressed, evening meetings, cottage-meetings, and Tuesday afternoon services were established in different places at the houses of inebriates and reformed men, which were well attended, and were successful and blessed in their results.

The number of workers was small, and the difficulties great, but God was with them.

I take the following from a report of the work:

On the second Sunday in January, 1875, Mr. John Garrabrant (who had been an instrument in God’s hand of great assistance to us) invited Mr. William Souter (who was called the drunken tailor) to come to our meeting. He came, forlorn and helpless as if about giving up; he thought and felt himself, that there was no use in trying. He was induced to get on his knees with us, and was told to sign himself to Jesus. The Holy Spirit then and there commenced the work in his heart, and from that moment he began a new life, and broke off entirely from his evil habits, and became a changed man, giving his heart to the Saviour. Oh, what a glorious day for him! Our rejoicing for a good while over him was with trembling; but oh, how we have blessed God for such a triumph of grace, ever since! A new beacon of hope and light was erected, and what an encouragement it was for perseverance in earnest and united prayer for that class of men! New ones found their way into these meetings, which awakened a greater degree of interest and earnestness in the work.

Among the first of these special cases was the coming in of a man, rather small, but with such a black and wicked sort of expression of countenance as one would instinctively shrink from. He seemed in every way strangely repulsive, but my eyes were riveted to him as he took a low seat just back of the door, holding his head down as if to hide himself in his soiled and shabby garments. He came invited by the Bible reader, who met him in the morning. He was cold, and as he said thought he could get warm in there, but thought of nothing more.

Very soon, as I watched him, he became very uneasy, moved about until he arose to his feet and began talking of his miserable life, and of the terribly wicked and abandoned condition that he was in. He said that he had been drinking, and was drunk when he came in there; but said he, I will never drink again, no, never; while I live I’ll never touch another drop. Is there any mercy for such a vile wretch as I am? And then dropping to his knees he began to pray for himself, and cry to God for mercy. He was truly and deeply convicted of his guilt as a sinner, and sought earnestly to know the way to a better course of life, and to give his heart to Jesus. Prayer was offered for him, and the meeting closed; but as he still remained I was unusually impressed to speak to him. But as I approached him, he was so forlorn and disagreeable from being steeped with rum and tobacco, that the first thing I asked him was, if he would give up his tobacco as well as strong drink. Laying my hand on his shoulder, I said, “Will you, my poor brother, give up everything and make a full surrender of yourself to Jesus, and become pure and clean, and not offensive and repugnant as you are now?”

“I will give up the drink, but can’t say I will tobacco, for I don’t think I could.”

I urged the point; he demurred, but finally said he would try.

“No use in trying: you _must_ do it; say you _will_,” I still urged.

“But it would not do for me to give up all at once when I have been chewing two papers every day, and often a good deal more, besides smoking: it would make me sick to break right off.”

“Not if Jesus helps you,” I said, “and He _will_. In your own strength you can never do it; in either case in His strength you can. Now promise me you will.”

“If I promise you,” he said, “I _shall_ do it, for bad as I am I never tell a lie.”