The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1893-02-01


1t was referred to Committee OF one
from each County. Il will say here that
this Committee was largely composed OF
prohibitionists, Bro. j. B. Watson being
the member from Anderson.) We'll,
they took it, dissected it, and made bill
out of it that gave satisfaction to ma
jority of the Committee. 1t was again
introduced and passed the House by
handsome majority and sent to the Sen
ate. I gave it my hearty support, be-
lieying it to be what a majority of my
constituents wanted. When the bill
came back to the House, we found that
all after the enacting words had been
stricken out, and the Evans Dispensary
bill had been substituted, and the only
thing that the House could do was to ac-
cept or reject. and we accepted, feeling
that if not prohibition, it was another
step in that direction. Now, these are
the facts in the case. Then why the
assertion, "Look out, ye arrogant, self
important Legislators" Webster's def
milton of arrogance is "haughty, proud,
insolent." How does that strike you,
81, you naughty, insolent fellow, who
betrayed the trust reposed in you? How
do you feel, honored or insulted? Belt,
what have you and John and Josh got to
say? But he may say that he dident
alIude to those who voted for prohibi-
ton. Then why dident he say SO in his
article? Why make it SO general7
1t was said by a minister Of the gospel
that the Legislature of 1890 and 1891 for
sobriety was largly above the average OF
similar assemblies, and that the present
Legislature is still an improvement. 1
was told while in Columbia Il don't vouch
for the truthfulness Of the staternent,)
that liquor man from Charleston came
to the city and spent week, and before
leaving he said that some sort Of prohibi-
ton measure would be passed, for he
never saw soberer set of men in his
life. It was said also that he was gam
bier and dident make his expenses.
Then to think of having that tremen-
dous bombshell "arrogance' thrown in
their faces, and before the smoke has
time to get out of their eyes another,
almost equal in size, "Solf-important
legislators" is hurled ut them. And
where did they come from? Pause
moment, friends Of prohibition, and see
where they came from.
Suppose we go to the next paragraph
in Bro. Garrett article, in which he says:
"It is true there are some features of the
new law which if strictly enforced would
make the Dispensary system far better
than the old bar-room system, such as
the prohibiting of the sale of intoxicants
of any kind to minors or persons addicted
to drinking to excess. This, if carried
out, will entirely prohibit drunkenness.
But does any one believe that such law
Is going to be enforced to letter 2"
Right here Bro. Garrett has furnished his
own hemp and tied his own moose, and
in this exciting moment has kicked
the prop out from under himself, and
kills his argument, for if this part of the
law can't be enforced none Of it can be.
Whilst Anderson County could enforce
the law, having strong public senti-
ment in its favor, what about Charleston,
Richland, Sumter, Georgetown and other
Counties where public sentiment opposes
it? Take Charleston. Suppose the Leg
islature had passed prohibition law for
the State, what would she have done?
She would have been in the fix that
man found himself at circus sale: he
bought an elephant, and when the keeper
handed him the halter he said, "what
must do with him. Would not
Charleston and other Counties been in
nice fix-a prohibition law thrust upon
them when they did uot want it and no
body to enforce it. Please imagine the
situation.
Look at the safeguards thrown around
the new law. See how the County Dis
penser is selected, and who is to select
him. Under the law it will take ma
jority of the freeholders of the towns and
cities entitled to Dispensary to sign
petition for dispenser. Like Anderson,
for instance. Who are the freeholders?
Look at them. DON'T you think they can
select man that will not violate the law
-one who would not, under any circum-
stances, sell to minor or drunkard. II
you don't think so then you have less
confidence in our city friends than have.
But the safeguards doesn't stop here.
The State board Of control appoints
County board Of control, composed of
three men, to look after the dispenser to
see that he does carry out the law. And
+ assure you that none but true men who
are In favor of the law will be appointed.
There are still other safeguards in the
shape OF bonns, heavy fines and imprison-
ment, forfeiture of Office, &C., &c.
I said above that the House accepted
the Senate's amendment as another step
in the direction of prohibition. Local
option was the first step, or the crawl of
the child. The Dispensary is the second
step or the pulling up by chair. Now,
If the friends of prohibition would en-
courage it, as the fond parents would the
child, it would not be long until prohibi-
ton would be upon its feet, and able to
stand. Will they do it7
But this is not the best feature Of the
bill, for while the "arrogant, self-impor
tant Legislature" failed to give the peo-
ple prohibition, they fixed it so that it is
possible for the Counties who said by
their ballots that they wanted it, to have
it. It is now in the hands of the freehol
ders of The towns. Ifa majority of them
fail to s!gn a petition for a dispenser and
ne will enforce the law, we will have
prohibition, for without a dispenser we
can't have Dispensary.
1t seems to me that there is the place to
preach. TO those who have the petition
signing power, and not to the 'arrogants,"
FOR they have done all they can do for the
present.
In answer to a question from Charles
ton liquor dealer as to whether he would
enforce the Dispensary law the Governor
ID 1T IL ~ n