The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1898-02-09
Money to Burn.

he annual report OF llc business
of the dispensary system for 1897,
which was published few days ago,
contains some figures which are worthy
of passing note.
The total amount Of the sales for
the year was 81: :252, 2S9. The total
population of the State is represented
by about the same figures. The show
ing means, therefore, that the sales of
liquors from the dispensaries repre-
scnted about one dollar per capita for
the whole population including both
sexes and all ages and conditions.
The dispcnsaries, however, proba-
bly, did not sell half the liquor that
was sold and consumed in the State.
IF they sold half, the whole sales
amounted to about $1,000, ,0CO, or two
dollars head for every man, woman
and child in the State, which shows a
liberal expenditure for expensive bev-
erages in year Of hard times The
people spent last year for alcoholic
beverages, in other words. the value
Of 100, 900 bales of cotton. at > cents
pound. And 100000 bales is one
eighth. or II per cent. of our average
cotton crop. 1t is not too much to
say perhaps, that we spent the whole
profit Of the large crop Of last year for
whiskey and beer and hard drinks of
that sort-while complaining loudly of
the hard times.
We are not preaching temperance.
but only considering facts Of record.
And there arc some others worthy Of
consideration.
The average family is estimated at
five persons, and the head of it usual
ly does the drinking for the rest.
Some women and some minors drink a
little, but they need not be taken into
the account. OF the population of
the State, it may be assumed, 25O,OOO
or one-ffth, represent the men. strict
ly speaking. and the drinking class,
broadly speaking. On the basis Of
this estimate, the total expenditure
for whiskey and such beverages last
year represented $40 per capita for the
adult male population, the working
and money making element. 1t was
pretty heavy tax on the wealth and
industrial resources of the State, and
was none the less hurtful for being
self-imposed and almost wholly vast
ed. The money so used was used to
very little good purpose. Most OF it
went out of the State to pay the man
ufacturers of the liquors, and was so
much dead loss to the State. The
same money would have done vast
deal of good if it had been kept in the
State and applied to the necessary and
useful public and private purposes.
1t would have paid all the expenses OF
the State government for two years.
If would have built and equipped
twcnty-fv $1,000 factories and
mills. 1t would have made the schools
and colleges flourish like bay trees. 1t
would have paid off large part of the
public debt.
The figures are not less impressive
when considered somewhat in detail
and in their bearings on the affairs
and conditions of towns and smaller
communities. a few examples are
taken at random: Abbeville spent
$50, 200; Aiken, s2s,2oO: Anderson.
s4l .O34: Barnwcll, s19,56O: Camden,
s21, 800: Chcstcr~ s35, 800: Darling
ton, s35, 900; Laurens: s27 900: New
berry, $4,000: Sumter. $50, 400:
Union. $24,7OO, and so on. Of the
smaller places, Allendalc spent Sl2,-
400: Bamberg, $500: Beaufort,
SIG 600 Blackvillc, $4,000: Dillon,
sl5, 900: Ellorce, $4,000: Eutawville.
$4,000: Moncks Corner, $4,000;
Mayesville, 81 400; Port Royal, So
600: Rantowies, 81, 900: Saluda. ST.
500: Tirzah, 300: Toddville, 81
600. and so on. Some of these places
are mere villages or railroad stations,
supplying small community of their
own people and neighbors. The fig
urcs credited to each would establish
and equip an important small manu-
featuring plant Of some kind, and the
figures represent only the dispensary
sales of liquor-about half of the
whole expenditure. And this waste
full expenditure is repeated annually.
The amount expended in any one OF
the several of the County towns
named, for dispcnsary liquors alone,
is far more than is allowed by the
State for the support of either one of