The Lancaster ledger. [volume] (Lancaster, S.C.) 1852-1905, 1900-07-28


age rather than the restraint of
vice. And as corrupt political
machine, Satan himself couldn't
improve on it
But they din in our ears that
prohibition is impracticable. I'm
practicable Let us have little
common sense about this question.
1t is no more impracticaole than
many other laws already on our
statute book, and which no sane
or civilized man would see re-
pcaIed. 1t is no more impractical
bic than the law against murder.
| doubt if there would ne as many
violations of q prohibition Law or
AS many viuIatOrs Of a prohibi
tion law in the county of Greens
VILE, ) {, IN q year as there are
violators of the murder law. And
there Is no sort of question that
it would he far better enforced
If all policemen were to go to
sleep the sleep of death-it would
he, then, far better enforced than
the law against carrying concealed
weapons is now.
Now, if we must not have a
prohibition law because some law
less persons would violate it, by
the saplc logic we ought to repeal
the laws against murder and
sgainst pistol carrying because
they arc violated almost every
day in the year, by anybody that
chooses to do 1T. Will the anti
prohihitionists advocate the re-
peal of these laws? They dare
not, and ct that il the logic of
their position. If you oughtn't
to put law on the ststute book
because it cannot he ideally en-
forced, then You ought to take off
the statute book all laws that are
not likewise enforced. They ad-
vocate the retention of the law
which has broken down In its
boasted moral aims, which is
violated every day in the year by
anybody that sees fit to do it, and
which, in addition to that, Is
vicious in moral principle, but
they oppose prohibition forsooth
because somebody would violate
it, although they must admit that
it is correct in moral principle.
1t has been openly charged that
the preachers and bsrkeepers are
in an alliance led by Col Hoyt to
defeat the dlspensary That
charge is too absurdly false to re-
ceive 4 moments credence from
any human being who has the
slightest lingering regard for
truth left in him. Senator Till
man, who made that charge, knew
1t 10 be false when he uttered 1T.
The charge cannot be interpreted
as anything else but a mean
and contemplate effort to break
the force of the almost unanimous
advocacy of prohibition by the
preachers, and served its author
rs good occasion also to throw
contempt upon class of men for
which he has in many other ways
expressed his contempt. 1t may
be true that some of the liquor
men are fighting the dispensary.
| am not the keeper of their con
sciences, and am not in alliance
with them. But | will tell you
this much is clear: The State has
prohibited their selling liquor as
individuals on the ground that the
business is wrong and detrimental
to the public welfare, and then
the State turns around and goes
into the business itself, and there's
by declares that the business is
right, and conducive to the public
welfare. The State forbids them
to engage in that business and
then the State is educating them
and all its citizens in the idea that
liquor selling as beverage is JUS
tifable on economic and moral
grounds. The State, in its blum.
dering attempt to correct and re-
strain a bad business, is teaching
its citizens that there are good and
sufficient reasons to engage in it..
1t is very certain that a man
would infer that when the State
forblds him to engage in a busi-
ness 1t is wrong and hurtful, and