The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1896-05-05
No Dispensag Profits This Year.

M UlSpeRSdy PlUlIT HIS IDdl.
THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS ONLY GET
NET EARNINGS.
Superintendent nIayaeld Says h
Dispensary System is Too Costly
He Suggests a New and More Eco
nomicaI Plan of Selling Liquor.
Special TO the News and Courier.
The Superintendent of Education
has advanced q new plan of solving
the liquor problem. Coming as 1t does
from n Of the leading Reformers of
the State 1t will be special interest.
In a recent address at the Alliance
picnic at Cane Creek, Richland county,
Mr.. Mayteld discussed the progress
OF education in the State for the past
few years, and showed what had been
done by citing Clemson College, Win
throp College, South Carolina College,
berry, Erskine, Charleston and all of
the female colleges of the State and
the condition OF the public schools.
He then discussed the future prospects
of the schools. While discussing this
he was interrupted by someone in the
audience, who wished to know If it
were true that the public shoots would
run six months. Mr.. Mayfeld said il
was not true, and showed why it could
not be rue by calling attention to the
fact hat the school funds could not
possibly be increased more thar one
third over what they are now He
stated that the amount from the poll
tax would not likely exceed the amount
now raised from that source, n that
the poll Ia at present was about one
third of the whole school tax, and that
the three mills would only increase
the total tax by about one-third.
Another person then asked how a
sufficient fund could be raised to u
the schools as long as vas necessary.
Mr.. Mayfield stated hat there were
but two ways to do this. One way was
for the country districts to do like the
cities and towns of the State are doing,
and that is tor the people of a district
to vote an extra tax on themselves,
which the new Constitution and the
new law permitted them to do, prOvid-
ed they do not exceed four mills extra
tax. Mr.. Mayfield said the other way
was to make use Of the net income
from the dispensary as far as it vent.
This brought up the question rs to
what the schools would receive from
Gue ulSpeusdry luuu InlS year. WI.
Maytield said that under the recent
Act Of the Legislature the schools
would get nothing from this source
this year, as the States net profits
were to be credited to the schools, but
the schools were to be charged with
an equal amount from the general dis
pensary account and hat the money
would go into the State treasury for
general purposes, and that the schools
wouldsnot get one cen this year from
that source. Mr.. Mayfeld responded
to a further question by saying that
the schools need not look for any
revenue from the dispensary for at
least two years, al the profit for this
year would not equal the general dis
pensary account with which it is being
charged that the net dispensary
income was such an uncertain quantity
that it would not be safe to count on it
for any purpose until it was already in
hand, and therefore it would never do
to run the schools and expect to pay
the school claims from the dispensary
net proceeds. Owing to this uncer-
tainty and delay, Q Mr.. Mayfield said,
as to when they would receive any part
of the ~dispensary profit. Mr.. Mayfeld
expressed great regret that the peo-
pie who had been depending on the
dispensary profit to help out the poll
tax and three-mill tax to give them
longer sessions and better schools
would have to be disappointed so far
as the ~dispensary profits were con-
cerned. He said the law and circum-
stances over which he had no control
made this the case.
This brought up the question as to
how this uncertainty and delay could
be avoided. Mr.. Mayfield was asked
to explain this If he could, and he re-
piled, that underline present law and
the present system unGer which the
dispensary had to be run there was NO
immediate relief that he could see.
Si;ir. Mayfield strongly favored the en-.
forcement of the present ~dispensary
law as long as it remained the law,
He earnestly declared himself in favor
of the ~dispensary idea. This state
ment indicated that he favored a diff.
ferent plan to the one now in force,
and in response to a question he re.
affirmed that he had always favored
the idea, but did not think the present
system the best one that could be
found. He said he had never thought
that the best plan forcarrying out the
dispensary idea had been adopted and
that he had always favored another
plan, which was a very different one
from the one, now In operation. He
said it was not his purpose to criticise
the present ~dispensary law, but he
thought his plan if it were given a
trail would prove to be a very much
more satisfactory ard better one. He
gave an outline OF his plan, saying
that to go into details fully would
take too long. Briefly stated, it was
rs follows:
MIR. M~AYFIELD'S PLAN.
There should be q separate and dis
tinct State department created to look
after this business, with a chief officer
who should be called State Inspector
four deputy inspectors, with the power
vested in the State Inspector to appoint
as many additional deputy inspectors
as occasion might demand, looking to
the opening up Of the business and
extra OCCASIONS all to be on salary and
bonded officers. He estimated that the
total expense of this department need
not exceed $4,000 per annum which
was q very small amount compared
with what Is spent in running the
present system.
That no liquor should be sold in any
county, or city, or town, or place that
was dry by statute.
That no liquor should be sold except
within Incorporated cities and towns
which were not dry by law, and that