The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1898-02-15

clteu Ine YaSe ia Bl9te history OF tt
spies being sept OUT to inspect tt
promised land. They returned sayin
it was u beautifGt aand, foRing wit
BILE giants there. FTh0saS giants wer
subsequently overcotne4by the ahildre
Of Israel. Prohibition, all WI admi
Is q beautiful land, butSShere ar
terrible giants, they slsita. Why ca
we not overcome stt6 giants? If thi
measure fsS SpREeeu, prayers for its sue
cess will go up from novels and fror
happy homes, but the dispensary la,
is not and will not be sustained b
prayer.
Mr. Crum: We have conditio
which confronts us. Which is better
prohibition, license or the dspensary
Barnwell County had tried all three
and carried prohibition overwhelming
ly. They appointed a committee t,
enforce the law. Several indictments
were before the grand jury at one
ana everyone vas threw cat We
had two classes of prohibitionists. ON
who had voted for it because the,
thought 1t right, the other, the bar
room keepers, who could run barroom
without licenses. When the law wa.
enacted, the tigers were at frs
very careful, but afterwards NOR,
bold. When the dispensary was triet
| In Barnwell, 1T was proved to be more
| of q prohibition measure than prohibi
tion itself. Its openness keeps thous
ands from drinking. We missed the
reeling walk Of drunkards. 1t has
been said that We ought not to sell tC
sober men but to drunkards.
The only thing we can do is to let
drunkatds drink and educate the rising
generation not to drink 1t will cost a
mint Of money to ouforce prohibition
and without a nickel OF profit. How
then enforce it without Increasing
taxes? VIII tho people endure it :?
No the dispensury law will ultimately
tend to prohibition, and IL pays its own
expenses.
Mr. Livingston offered an amend
ment which does away wi;h the sale
for medicinal purposes in MIR. Childs'
Dill and makes 1t even more prohibit
tory.
Mr.. Livington: What say will not
change any votes, for your minds are
already made up, but will be untrue
to my constituents If did not raise my
voice for prohibition. For so years,
not within the confines of my county,
has the disturber of the homes of men
been authorized by law. do not mean
to say that no liquor is drunk, but
even on sales days even before sun
down, the men go to their homes sober.
My amendment forbids the sale of
liquor for beverages and provides for
the winding up OF the business OF the
dispensary. If we are going to meet
the issue, let us meet it squarely and
have absolute prohibition.
Mr.. Kinard: / feel it my duty to
present few facts. The other day
when Mr.. Childs appealed so eloquent
~ to the church members, | thought
he had bill suited to the eloquent
speech he made. | did not know it
was a second dispensary law, but an
absolute prohibition measure.
| accepted the dispensary law when
thought | could not get prohibition,
for | thought it long stride in the
right direction. While the manage
ment has been defective, it has been
a great means for good. Had the law
been carried out, there now would be
no dissatisfaction. When we want a
good law, we must enforce it. | favor
prohibition, but | don't think this is
a prohibition law. 1t enlarges the
machinery, for there will be dispen-
sary in every county and every drug
gist a barkeeper. The state of affairs
will almost rival the barroom. The
State would still be in the dspensary
business. The troubles would be in
creased, now we get it openly as a
beverage, then we would have abuse
OF medicinal use. | am in favor of re.
form and OF Tightening down on the
dispensary law, but [ do not favor Mr..
Childs, bill. | fail to see that it will
accomplish prohibition, although ]
favor prohibition.
Mr.. e. D. Smith halls with delight
tho placing OF the issue fairly and
squarely. What is the proper atti-
tude of South Carolina toward a re-
cognized evil ? Is not the traffic of
liquor an evil? The first gentleman
VINO spoke, said that prohibition is
right, but we are not ready for it. 1t
shall be less loyal to the truth in it's
entirety than he who suffered death
for truth and right. Would it not be
better to say to the children we will
their parents down? We sell our
selves out to the liquor business. We
levy direct import upon the poor un-
fortunates to run our government.
When this dispensary was first advo-
Gated, 1t was said that it was pro.
hibition measure. Afterwards it was
with surprise that | saw letter from
an Official recommending that the bust
nesS was doing nicely and needed to be
enlarged. Dare we look the truth
squarely and fairly? Shall we as
wedkliLgs stultify ourselves or shall we
do what is right? When will we ever
become ready for prohibition ? When
will the human race arrive at the stage
where passion is held in obeyance
AS men, let us not compromise with
evil.
Mr.. Mauldin had been disposed to
dodge the measure. AT first he was
not satisfied that this was prohibl-
tion measure. He Is for prohibition
straight. All have acknowledged that
prohibition Is right. II 1t Is wrong,
don't vote for it. | want to stand by
prohibition, for 1t is right. Cursed
| is he who putteth his bottle to his
| brothers mouth" We should rise man
to man and WELD the sceptre OF pro
hibition in South Carolina. Start pro
hibiGion at home. Mr.. Livingston's bill
and he was obliged to vota for the
amendment.
DR.. Wyche thought the dispensary
law and prohibition had been discussed
over South Carolina until every mar
had already made up his mind as tt
his duty. He defends the position o
the advocates of the dispensary ex
presses admiration for the author ant
for the advocates of the Childs bill
while protesting against the insinua
tions that the dispensary advocate
were dodging the issue. II we coult
enforce law prohibiting people from
drinking liquor, ne would support tina
heartily. However, where the senti