The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1900-04-25

UAOla1 CoootaU UuiHIS, WIZ lAfS0o luC
sanctity Of the citizens home-Which
in ninety-nine cases out Of every hun
dred prove to be the lairs Of blind
tigers" But suppose you swallowed
your scruples and did have constabu-
larry, how would you pay them when
you derive no revenue from the sale Of
liquor to pay them with? Although,
liquor can now be obtained lawfully in
South Carolina. yet it required last year
the sum of $42, ,S62.76 with which to pay
the constables. Therefore, if you were
to prohibit the sale of liquor absolutely,
does it not follow as natural conclu-
sion that the temptations to violate the
law would be increased hundred-fold,
and, consequently, larger constabu-
larry force and more money to pay them
with would be necessary?
Only few days ago the Legislature
refused to appropriate one hundred
thousand dollars for the common
schools, although they are sadly in
need of more money, therefore, you
could hardly expect it to raise by direct
taxation fifty or hundred thousand
dollars with which to enforce a law
against the sale Of an article that nine
tenths of the people now use. Don't
you know that it would not? But you
say that you would not have con-
stabulary force, that Public Senti-
ment" would enforce the law.
As ] stated before, l have had little
experience with Public Sentiment" en-
forcing Prohibition. In the first place,
you will find that just as soon as you
attempt to prevent the ''Public" from
getting liquor, the Sentiment will
be against the law and that ''every-
bodys business will be nobody's bust
ness"
We now have law against carrying
concealed weapons, which habit pub
lie Sentiment, condemns but how many
cases have you ever seen brought into
court by citizens who we're prompted by
Public Sentiment" to prosecute the
offender? All, but you say, that it
will be the duty Of the county officers
to enforce the law, just as they would
any other upon the statute books. |
agree with you fully that it would be
their duty to do so; but would they do
it? Experience has taught US that they
will not enforce law against the sale
Of liquor. Why? Because to enforce
it they would be preventing nine:
tenths of the voters from drinking, and
the drinkers and the men who sell
liquor are generally very potent factors
i'll county politics,
Even now, under the Dispensary law,
you can count ths indictments for the
violation of the same brought by county
officers, upon the fingers Of your hands,
and it is found necessary to have q
separate and distinct constsbulary to
enforce the law with.
The following from Marlboro county,
one of the strongest and Oldest Prohi-
ton counties in the State, sustains the
above views: "Clif Dorm, State Dis
pensary constable stationed here, cap
tured last night one dozen bottles of
Old Pepper rye Whiskey in the ex-
press Office. There are beyond doubt
three or four blind tiger establishments
IN town running at full blast; everybody
knows It and many Of the best citizens
are anxious to break them up, yet they
continue to do business in apparent de-
Gance of law and public protest. Ben
nettsville is becoming notorious for
whiskey drinking and the majority OF
it is blind tiger liquor, and this state
of affairs will be the means Of ests y
fishing a Dispensary in toe town.
This correspondent has always main
tsined that Bennettsvilie was practl-
cally Prohibition town, which was
true, but within the last few months
the facts and prepondersnce Of evidence
are in the other direction. 1t can be
broken up and the violators punished
if the officers do their duty.
The above is from the report Of the
local correspondent Of the News and
Courier February q. Men do not look
upon the violation of law against the
sale Of LIQUOR as they do upon one that
is against crime malum in Sc, for they
regard it as a personal right to drink,
and that the man who sells to them is
but catering to their appetites and that
they are (norally) particeps criminis.
Consequently it is very difficult mat
ter to get evidence against those who
sell liquor illegally, as there is GER
tain degree of odium attached to it that
men Of character do not wish to volun-
tarily assume. Would you play the
''role Of informer or attempt the duties
OF the sleuth- -hound?"
Another objection to Prohibition
would be that drug-stores would be al
lowed to handle alcoholic liquors for
the purpose of compeunding drugs.
This would be swapping "the devil for
the WITCH" for they would soon be
nothing more nor less than bar-rooms.
We all know how hard it is now, under
the Dispensary law, to prevent them
from selling "Soft Drinks" aad Malt
Extracts" that contain greater per
cent. of alcohol than the law allows.
can best illustrate the condition Of
affairs that would prevail, it We had
Prohibition, by the following anec-
dote: Two women were talking about
their husbands who were addicted to
the habit of drinking too much. One
said to the other, II am so glad to IL
form you that my husband has sobered
up, and has stopped drinking whiskey."
Her companion exclaimed, 'Pray tell
me, what did he taper of on?" To
which the ether replied, ''Spi.itus fru-
menti, which they sell at the drug
store"
Having heard a great deal about
Prohibition in Maine, and being anx-
ious to know from an official source if
the lew was ever violated there, /
recently sent for, and now have before
me, copy of the Attorney Generals