The Temperance Debate That Rocked Seattle

It was my good fortune to spend part of the past week in your city, and I availed myself of the opportunity of attending the temperance convention. While your reporter has furnished a framework of that convention, he has utterly failed to breathe into his report the glowing spirit which was its life. I was deeply impressed with the plain earnestness displayed in the convention's practical work and the oneness of all minds as to the end in view—prohibition. The earnestness was remarkable. No observer could possibly imagine these women were met together for a pastime. The business went on with commendable promptness during the first two days. But then came the tenth resolution, relating to a plan of work, when instantly there burst forth, as from concealed batteries, such a fusillade of hot shot as assailed my very ears. This engagement between what I would call the common-sense party and the extremists lasted over an hour. There was much confusion, some sharp disputing as to rights on the floor, but through it all a thread of order was maintained. If there are still people who cherish the fond delusion that women don't know what they are about when working to carry a point in a convention, they should have been there. The presiding officer, especially during this stormy session, displayed a brilliancy of repartee and developed a wealth of resources in the emergency rarely equaled. But finally, quiet was restored, and the more practical wing of the convention carried the day by substituting a resolution for the one discussed. The good feeling manifested by the visitors and the graceful acquiescence of the defeated called forth admiring comments from observers.