The age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1897-1902, 1899-02-04
DISPENSARY BILL.
Hon. Sid Bowie Gives Reasons Why
He is Against 1t.

Montgomery, February 3.-(SpeeiaD-Hon-
s. j. Bowie, of Admission, gave out the fol-
lowing interview on the dispensary ques-
ton:
At am opposed" said he. ito the dispen-
sary bill now pending before the leslsla-
ture. In the first place there are many IN
herent objections to the bill ITSELF TOO
many to be stated briefly, but very Few
of the patent objections to the d moe
pendent of the question of principle III
yoived are First, the bill provides that
the dispenser shall be absolutely without
interest in the result of The business,
working upon a fixed salary and shaii
have both the buying and the selling. IL
is IMPOSSIBLE under such a provision, TO
prevent any great frauds, and its ineVita-
bic result will tend to corruption 1t may
be replied that the tendency OF the exist
ing laws practices upon that subject are
the same, but the vital point of difference
is. that if an individual be dishonest or
corrupt it affects him and perhaps the linn
tied number who come within his influ-
enoe, but when system holds cut a pre-
MUM to dishonesty and corruption upon
the part of public official 1t involves the
entire body petite. 1t is said that the dis
pensary can be removed for cause. So
may judges be impeached, but how many
successful impeachment trials have we
witnessed in the part quarter of a CEN
tuyy? Very few indeed. The reason that
the system inevitably produces corruption
and debauchery upon the part of public Of
ficials, is in the fact that no system of
checking can be devised which will hold
any man to strict account who keeps both
sides of the ledger. No system can be de-
vised which will prevent rebates or the de-
struction or duplication of bills, as the ease
may be. Ii the purchasing power was
placed in different hands from that of the
selling power, it might eliminate part of
the difficulty growing out of the PROPOSE
ton that in this bill there is no
adequate means of ascertaining the
would still leave open the system
of rebates upon which dishonest Of
fcials are said to have grown rich where
the experiment has been tried. 1t cannot
be answered that the bill provides against
the selection of any but honest men. 1t is
the custom to denounce the liquor dealer
as the great foe to society, the most cor
rupt and infamous character which we
possess, and yet it is from the ranks of
these men that it is absolutely necessary
that the dispenser should be selected. Will
any Of the good men of the cloth, and that
high class of public citizens, who seem to
be swept away by this proposition, consent
to act in the capacity of dispenser? Ger
tainly not. Moreover, if they did, they
would be ineligible because the law re-
quires the dispenser before making a pur-
chase ORDER to sample and test the
liquor proposed to be bought Would these
good people be competent as judges, as
connoisesseurs upon the quality of the
liquor they would sell? Certainly not The
bill, therefore, in the nature of things, re-
stricts the office of dispenser to the de-
spised about which we hear so much and
if they are unfaithful in the enforcement
OF the present law, and daily committing
attractions of them, how can we hope to
trust them in the capacity of public
officials?
Another glazing defect in the measure is,
that 1t provides for test of the sample
before it is bought, but no provision is
made for test of the actual liquor that
is delivered to see whether it comes up to
the sample or not. Again, it legislates out
OF existence in this state the wholesale
dealers in spirituous and malt liquors,
against whom no complaint has been
lodged, and compels the purchase of it by
the local dispenser from other states. That
this is an unnecessary and unwise provision
would seem obvious.
Again, it is loudly boosted that the dis
pensary Jaw has been an unqualified sue
cess in the state of South Carol Ina Whether
it has been a success or not, [ am not
prepared to say; but the strongest argu-
ments advanced in favor of this bill are
the particulars in which it differs from
the law in South Carolina. If that law
be success, it was made SO by the strong
hand OF Governor Tillman, enforced by the
constabuary to the extent of the desecra-
ton of homes, the shedding of human blood
and the taking of human life. What made
1t, then, success, if 1t be one? 1t is the
constabulary; and yet this bill omits all
nose features whereby it was made posi-
BILE to enforce the South Carolina law In
other words, we are treated to the play
of Hamlet" with the prince omitted. To
avoid the argument based upon the OBJ
noNious features of the South Carolina law,
it has been left inefficient and impotent 10
do more than furnish a shadow with the
substance gone.
But these are objections to the particular
bin that is before the legislature. There
are higher grounds which obtain against
the law as a principle. Who will say that
there was single member of this legisa-
ture elected because of his views either for
or against this proposition? Who will say
that ii has been made an issue in single
county OF this state in any election? And
ye, it is proposed on the spur of the mo-
ment, and In wave of enthusiasm to enact
law changing the whole current and treat
ment of this question in the past, without
applying a single test TO determine whether
or not the people desire and are prepared
n "a k5A "a 20