The Pickens sentinel. [volume] (Pickens, S.C.) 1871-1903, 1893-03-02
1T rs STRANGE.

In speaking of the dispensary law, the
SENTINEL says: "The straDgest thing about
the whole matter is that prohiiitionists are
in favor of the law. while liquor men are
against it," If our neiGlibOr would free his
vision from prejudice and look straight at
tho purposes and the certain results Of the
law, there would be nothing strange about
"tlIc whole matter" Lay aside the fact,
that the law was passed 10y rcform legisla-
turc and dive into it with determination to
give credit where credit is due, and there
will be no trouble ii seeing the merits as
well rs the supposed evils of the measure.
The reason why the prohibitionists are in
favor OF the dispcnsary law is plain, when
we compare the license system and the for
mcr prohibitory measures with the dispen
sary scheme. Many towns which had the
licensed saloon and changed it for prohibit
ton, return to the license business at the
FIRST opportunity, because the effect Of pro-
hlbltion under the local option law was sim
ply transfer Of tile liquor business from
the saloon TO the drug store aud blind tiger,
without revenue to the town. The prohibi-
tioniSlS sec the defects and impcrrcc ton of
former prohihitory laws and, of course, ac-
ccpt the Evans law as the only practical
means Of getting lid of the odiolls and dam
gCrOus SnlOOn.-JOurnul
Oar ncighbor does an inj uslcc in accus-
ing:us Of being cjudiccdhgains.t tho dispcn-
sary law because it was passcdIby "reform
legislature Our friend should not do
this without pointing out the prejudice
which it supposcs we havc. If there is
anything in the language we used which
could be contrucd to mcun what our neigh
Dor alleges, the "Rcform Legislature" he
speaks of must have changed the meaning
OF the English language during its reccn
session.. We have not found it, however
In the last acts, and therefore t;skc it fo,
granted that nothing OF the sort was don,
ana that our uttcrancc could not mcau prri
udicc. 1t as our friend argues, prohibition i,
failure why not the dispcnsary law also
The diSpcnsary act is not more stingen
than any other law upon the Statute book
which seeks to prohibit anything. Ifblint
tigers arc in operation in any county 0
town there was law for their punishment
before the Evans dispcnSary act was eve
heard Of. The State had its offices and i
was their duty to bring these things to the
attention of the Courts if tho law WIS be
Ing violated; and it is flimsy indeed tu s>,
that law is II failure and that "many town
"n'e'' hau thc licensed saloon and change,
1t '"r Prohlol'loh, return To tn" license bus
!ncSs ut the first opportunity, because tho
r'''''' "' pr"hi'''ion under the local op,icI
law WAS SIMPLY ntranSt"r to the liquor bus
i,'SH 'i"" 'hc S"'o"h |" the drug store and
bllnd tiger, because the citizens and oil
'c'S o' inc Ia" 'illcd to do their duty il
of1h@lhS inc "ilcnders OF the law to trial
we Il" say II Is strange that prohibition
lS'S arc IN iaVor ol the dlspcnsary law. |
S"'''c'n'''S we cannot understand. F0
men VINO nave heretofore condemned .h,
S"le' oar'cfihS, giving away, drinking o
hah"lihS III any other way liquor AS y bcv
eraSc' now I" he in favor Of y law which
makes every citizen Of the State Il partner
III TIC saloon business and dealer of wine
| liquors, beer, etc rs Il boycrnrr vh.th.
they want to u, ~, n,t 70 ,,,,,,;.
cannot understand
| t..