Virginia citizen. (Irvington, Va.) 1891-1921, 1903-06-05
Friday, June 3, 1908.
A MIsCoNsTRUCTIoN oFoURvIEws.

A MISCoNSTRUCTIONO OF OUR VIEWS
The esteemed VIRGINIA CITIZEN. which
is nothing il not prohibitions ardent
friend, takes us somewhat to task i'm Its
last issue for our remarks concerning the
elect OF prohibition in Kansas, which re
marks were called forth by n statement
oil the South Boston Neeos concerning
TINS doctrine as applied to the State men
TONED. The CITIZEN thinks that we take
gloomy view OF temperance matters
out such is not the case We are as anx.
ious as our contemporary to see the liq.
uor traffic regulated, only we differ rs to
the proper method OF regulation. In
gaining attention to the well known fact
tnat Kansas is prohibition State in
name only, we were referring ONLY 70
Kansas and not to other States or conn.
Ties or cities where local option prevails,
ana though we have no doubt that in
some OF them equally bad conditions ex.
ISL, yet we cheerfully concede to the C,T.
ZEN that such is not the case in nil oI
them, and we further coneede that the
Jaw may be in fault in those communities
where "speak-easies' exist. but how do
you propose to remedy the fault? These
same "speak-easies' have existed ever
since local option and prohibition became
established institutions, and SO far MS
our observation has gone we are convin-
ced that the licensed saloon is for moro
prelerablefr from both moral and financial
point OF view. But we did not intend TO
20 INTO discussion of local option. since
we believe that question is for each COM
munlty to decide for itself. but we still
insist that the South Boston Ners can
not bring Kansas forward as n shining
example oil successful prohibition. and we
oeheVe still that the best interests of Vir-
gina demand that we heed. rather than
iohow, the example which comes to us
rom Maine, New Hampshire. Vermont
ana hansas.-Freoiericks5urg Star.
1t is our regret that the views of
our Fredericksburg friend should
have been deemed misconstrued
POSSIBLY we might yet get together
on the temperance question. The
CITIzEN disclaims any prohibition
sentiment such as is generally under
derstood by that word. We have no
patience with prohibition as politi-
Cal factor; nor are we for absolute
prohibition in respect to the handling
OF liquor, certainly not under con-
ditions that exist in some so-called
prohibition States. We are for recu-
tafaon, and by regulation we mean
absolute control of the traffic by the
people of a community or State.
When this is granted, and the officers
OF the law respect the wishes of the
people, Virginia will be regulated 10
suit our taste. We are opposed to
the saloon because we have experi-
enced its evils and would wipe it
out as we would, if we could, the
"black death" did it visit our shores.
Now, if the Star agrees with us
that the whiskey traffic should be
regulated, and it does not approve of
doing it via the Mann law or local
option, temperance people would well
come any feasible suggestion it could
offer to effect the desired end. But
until such suggestion is applied and
found more effective than present
plans do not throw down the bars and
let the vicious element of our State
stalk freely over the land.
Clearly the law-or the executors
Of it, rather-is at fault in local
option communities where "speak-
easies" flourish, but this may not be
always the case. With us here the
outlaws are becoming fewer, and al
though their baneful influence has
been exerted to the utmost they and
their followers are growing fewer.
When this becomes overawing then
the law is more likely to be exc
cuted and public men who uphold
or defend the dens will have their
small measure of shame so touched
that they too will stink away and
become captives of the enemy.