The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1899-02-01
Down With the Dispensary !


statement:
Will you please allow me to explain
my position on the whislicy question?
What the reporter put me down aS
saying does not do me Justice. In fact.
what said WAS not intended for publ
cation III all. To start with, let me
state that have no desire or authority
to speak for the ProhibitionistS of the
State. Any views may express arc.
mine ns am individual. and the l'rOhi-
bitiOnlSts are not responsible for tlicm
in any shape. form or fashion. A the
same time | would not knowingly take
amy position hat might be calculated
to iniurc the cause of the Prohibitions
lists. for ann as Staunch believer in
prohibition. upon principle. a> ever.
| and will do rs much for its sake us any
| man i'll the State. My friends. OF some
| OF them. may differ with me rs to the
means of accomplishing our ends, but
they will not question my motives.
| What is the situation that cOnfrOntS
us! We have the .liSpcnSaly system.
| Under the Constitution of lS!Lj we can
not 20 back to the old bar-roonI Sy>-
TEN. If We let matters remain in their
present shape what have we accom-
| plisllcd: The liSpcnsaiy system can
never lead to prohibition. 1t has fought
us heretofore at every step. II las
done more to make the whisllcv traffic
appear respectable than any system
| that we have ever had. The longer
| the system stands thc more power will
II acquire and the more influence will
it exercise in political circles. The
tremendous power it already has can
only be- known fully by those who have
come i'll contact with its practical work
ings III Il campaign. How eagerly are
the positions upon the board of control
sought after. Why! Partly, ut least,
because they realize the power of the
dispcnsary in elections, and they want
its influence cxerted in their behalf.
If allowed to stand will its influence
along these lines be decreased: | re-
peat the question: What have the Pro
libitiOnists to gain by allowing the
present system to stand! Absolutely
nothing. If it stands they have gained
nothing, and their fight of last year
counts for nothing.
On the Othrr hand. What would the
repeal of The dispcnsary .mcan I" us
With it repealed, and with no other
law enacted, we would have prohibi-
ton i'll every county in the State. Tie
tacking on of Il local option feature
would mean that in those counties
where public sentiment is not Snifi
ciently strong to give lis prohibition,
the license system OF the county dis
pensary system would be in force.
! Under eithero these systems we would
have all of the good features Of the
present diSpcnsary, for under the Con
stitutiOn they have remained. If pro
hibitiOn were forced upon said colln-
ties it could not be enforced for it is
law which is not supported by public
sentiment. The enforcement of
il prohibition law i'll those counties
would do our cause harm, because we
would be held responsible for its en-
f0rccment. True, we might have.
whiskcy rings to fight in those particu-
lar counties in the future, but what
would they be us compared to the great
State whiskcy ring now in existence:
] believe that at least three fOurtllS OF
the counties in the State would Jrniain
under the operations of the prohibition
law. Would that not give Us three
fOurths of I, victory, which is better
| than Ict ~ .,1l \
counties would give lis Il tremendous
leverage in our future fights. The
only sound objection that can be urged
against the view that present is that
the present Administration is hostile
to prohibition, and that, therefore, the
law might be killed by weak kliccu
enforcement thereof. There is some
force i'll such an argument, but in my
Judgment that objection will be niorc
than offset by the benefits that will
accrue. Remember, we get rid of the
tremendous influence of the dspensary
inp0litics. With the dispcnsary ont of
Our way and with three fourths Of the
counties in the State at our back, sure
ly we will be in Il better position to
push OH to complete victory. The plan
which advocate, i'll Il nut shell, means
to make the most of our present Oppor-
tunities-tO take three fOurths of Il
loaf rather than no loaf at all; take and
occupy the position from which we can
make the best fight in the future. 1t
does not mean Il sacrifice of principle.
1t means that as practical men we are
to seize what is best for us when the
opportunity offers; it means that in our
Judgment it is better not to have whis-
key legally sold in three fOurths of the
counties than to have it sold in all. To
urge that by doing as advocate we
become allied with the whiskey men is
all bosh and sentiment. We do moth
ing of the kind. On the other hand, if
We are offered prohibition in three
fOurths of the counties in the State and
fail to take it, where does the RESPONSE
bility lie? For my part am willing to