The morning news., 1899-11-19
PROHIBITION IN KANSAS.

Kansas is a prohibition state. Ex-Sen-
ator ingalls, was asked not long ago what
he thought of the workings of the law,
His reply was: "The temperance people
have the law, and the drinkers have the
whisky. so both ought to be satisfied" In
so far as the statement of conditions is
concerned, MIR. Ingalls, seems to be about
right. The temperance people have the
law; that is, it is on the statute books.
But it is neither respected nor obeyed.
There are said to be more drinking places
in Kansas at present, under the prohibi-
tory law, than there ever We're under a
license system. In the city of Leaven-
worth there are some seventy places where
it is we'll known that liquors are Sold in
a population of $4,000 persons. In Topeka
there are hundreds of drinking places nom
inally concealed in Easements, in back
rooms, or above the first floors but ac-
tually wide open to everybody who desires
a drink and has the money to pay for it.
The blind tiger" is even more prolific in
Kansas under prohibition than it Is in
South Carolina under the dispensary, and
that is saying a great deal; for in any
South Carolina city liquor drinking places
are more numerous and more wide open
than any Georgia city of corresponding
size.
The Kansas towns and cities, however,
according to a Topeka correspondent of
the New York Times, make their blind
tigers contribute to the public funds,
through a system of fines which are im-
posed at regular intervals, thus virtually
licensing the illegal sale of liquor through
a mulct law process. The municipalities
say they need the money thus raised, and
are compelled to have it. They cannot
stand the extra taxation that would be
necessary TO replace the funds cut off by
the prohibition law, hence are forced to
the expedient of rounding up and fining
the Illicit liquor dealers once or twice
year, according to the tacit agreement.
The process is no doubt somewhat similar
to the rounding up and finiug of gamblers
in Savannah, with which the local public
is so familiar.
After a thorough and searching inves-
tigation of the condition of every town in
the state of 1000 population and over"
says the correspondent of the Times, 'It
is safe to assert that not in one of them
has the prohibitory law been observed"
The authorities merely require some sort
of concealment and the traffic goes on
without other interference than the occa-
sional fine. The temperance people have
the law, and the drinkers have the whis-
ky" The experience of Kansas in this
line is not novel. The history of enforced
prohibition has been the same everywhere.
Even in Maine the birthplace of prohibi-
tion, the law is notoriously disregarded,
and drunkenness abounds.
Leaving out of the consideration the
hundreds of thousands of dollars of reve-
nues from liquor dealers. and which would
have to be replaced by direct taxation if
the Willingham bill were to become law,
is there any good reason for thinking that
Georgia would be more successful In en-
forcing a prohibition law than Maine and
Kansas have been? The Prohibitionists
advocate the bill upon high moral grounds;
is there anything highly moral in the con-
dition of affairs produced by the prohib-
ton law in Kansas, or the dispensary law
in South Carolina3 We do not believe that
the Prohibitionists themselves would claim
that there Is
In her local option law Georgia has the
means of achieving real prohibition, based
upon the consent of the governed. Would
she be wise to lose the reality through
grasping at the shadow?