Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1901-02-06
LOCATION OF DISPERSARIES.
At Least all the Voters of Precinct Should
Have a Say.

Editor Yorkville Enquirer:
The provisions Of the law which pro-
vides that any town or city may or
may not have a dispensary, according
to the desire Of the people, the same
being settled by holding an election on
the question are very good; but
like many other good laws it Is
inadequate. 1t is deficient in that
when the question as to whether
or not a dispensary shall be establish
ed in a certain town Is put to a vote,
it does not give all who are concerned
in the matter, the privilege Of voting.
If I am correctly informed on the
subject, the law only provides that
registered voters living within the cor
porate limits Of the town are permitted
to vote in such elections. Now, as q
matter of fact, there are numbers Of
people living just outside the corpor-
ate limits Of towns, and for miles
away, for that matter, who are just as
deeply concerned and will suffer from
the evil effects of such an institution
as the dispensary just as much as the
people who live in the town. 1t Is not
just that these people should be barred
from voting, when such a question Is
to establish a public institution such
as a dispensary without the vote Of
majority of all who are concerned.
When such a question is put to vote
in a town, the law should at least pro-
vide that all voters residing in the pre-
cinct In which said town Is located
should have the privilege Of voting.
In some cases people living outside Of
towns are more interested than some
who live in the town. To illustrate we
will imagine a citizen living in town
who does not drink himself, and who
has no sons to be led astray. There
fore he is not personally concerned
along that line. He votes for dispen-
sary in his town because he thinks 1t
will bring dollars into the treasury.
The dispensary Is established. Living
just outside Of that town Is a man
who has one or more sons. who drink
themselves to death and fill drunkards'
graves, all the result Of a dispensary
being established in that town. Now,
the father Of these boys was bitterly
opposed to the dispensary being put
there; but he was not permitted to
cast his vote against it. Is that just?
Do you call that equal rights to all? /
call that close akin to taxation without
representation.
Take the town Of Rock Hill. for in
stance. Numbers Of people living just
outside Of the town are no doubt bit
terly onnosed to dispensary being put
there If it is done it will be done
against their will and without their
having been permitted to cast their
votes against it. Thev will feel, and
justly so, that they have been greatly
wronged but they have no redress
whatever. They were not permitted to
vote against the institution; neither
will they be allowed to vote for its re-
moval, If the question was put to a
vote. AS matter of fact a dispensary
at Rock Hill will be the ruin Of more
than one good man. Numbers Of men
who will not condescend to patronize
a blind tiger would buy whisky from q
dispensary at Rock Hill. If dispen-
sary is put there against my will 1T
should not be done without my having
had the privilege of voting against 1t.
The prosperity Of the town is due to
and dependent upon the trade Of the
surrounding country. to some extent at
least his being the case the citizens
of these towns should not establish an
institution which so many good people
abhor and are so bitterly opposed to,
without, at least. giving all who are
concerned. the privilege of voting for
or against it. Or rather the law should
not allow this to be done. AS I stated
in the outset, the evil effects of dis
pensary are felt for many miles from
1t in every direction, and voters who
live in the precinct in which town Is
town is located, should have the privi-
lege Of voting when the question of dis
pensary or no dispensary is put to a
vote in that town. 7 hope the proper
authorities will consider this matter
and make such amendments to the law
as are needed. OF course. I may be
wrong: but it seems to me that the
law does not come up to all require
ments. J. K. ScoGGINs.
Ogden, S. c., February 2. 1901.