The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1903-11-25
THE ADVERTISER.
LAURENS. $. c., Nov, 90, 1908.
Charleston and the Dispensary.


II the bringing of a suit against dis
pensary constables in the 70 ieral
courts by O mau who claims to be a
o subject of the German emperor Is the
cause of the withdrawal of the city's
share in the dispensary profits from
the city of Charleston, then it is no
just cause or excuse. In other words,
it Is an outrage on the city of Charles
ton. To blame the city Of Charleston
because a citizen of another country
exercises his legal rights in the United
States court Is q proposition too ride
nlous for discussion among intelligent
people. The laws of the United States
permit foreigners not Da'uralizsd to
sue in the United States courts. The
only way 10 evade the law and de-
priye the foreigners of its benefit Is to
lynch the foreigners or drive them out
OF the country.
On the other hand, if the dispensary
officers have satisfactory evidence that
the municipal authorities of the city of
Charlie .ton fail to assist In the en-
forcement Of the d~ispensary law, an
other and different proposition is sug-
gested. However, it must be said that
Governor Heyward's indiscreet remark
about the appeal by the foreigner to
the federal courts tends to obscure the
real question and to lend color to the
charge that the foreigners suit is the
nub of the drastic policy SO suddenly
adopted.
Without defending any laxity Of the
enforcement of thu law by Charleston
%juries, it is we'll enough to call atten-
tion to the unhappy truth that the
state of South Carolina has itself left
uudone and un 'aid nothing to imbitter
the Charleston people against the dis
pensary law. Before the d~ispensary
law wa, enacted, general and particu.
lar persecution of Charleston was the
habit of successful politicians in this
state. Denunciation of the largest
town in the state and it's people was
deliberately made fashionable. When
governor instead of tactfully approach
ing a delicate situation found it good
politics to declare in effect that he
would run rough shod over Charles
ton. The metropolitan police law a lit
tie later was enacted for Charleston's
benefit. AT that time Char.e ,ton's
chief OF police was o staunch reformer.
The metropolitan system was therefore
not put into effect. A year later, after
q hard municipal contest, there was a
change Of mayors. The new mayor
naturally appointed one OF his W fol
lowers as head OIL the police, the reform
incumbent having actively opposed his
election. AT that moment and not I'M
til that moment, when the governor
discovered that his friend the chief of
police had been whipped in a fair and
square fight and would lose his job, he
imposed the metropolitan system. The
reform chief of police continued in Of
flee as head of the metropolitan police.
Under his previous administration,
blind tigers had lourIshed. They on
tinued to flourish. Thus it will be seen
that the enforcement of the whiskey
law was made purely a matter OF poll.
tics in the city of Charleston and that
the will of the majority in the commu-
nifty was wantonly o~ver-ruled.
The people of Charleston arc human.
They do not relish being kicked, even
If the kicker be the administration in
Columbia. For ten years at least the
policy OF the political powers has been
to insult Charleston whenever it was
regarded sharp politics, and, mean
while, there was a hue and cry when
S richly partisan statutes met with OPP
position. We believe that the dispen-
sary law will never be fully enforced in
Charleston. When the law was passed,
the patent fact that town and city con-
ditions differ was ignored. The effort
to make a law apply to o city merely
because 1t Is suited to the country never
succeed in Charleston. There are in
situations existing in every large town
in open violation of law which do not
aud could not exist In the country. Yet
nobody suggests their forcible extirpa.
ton. In New York city the liquor laws
have been largely violated for years
simply and solely because the New
IOTh SoaI0 leSiSidUOrS nave 9uuedycrSG
to force upon that town statutes which
while suited to the people In the small
er towns of New York state are in
tensely Irritating to those OF the great
metropolis. The simple truth is that
the liquor question in Charleston has
never been approached with skill or
tact or ordinary common sense by the
liquor authorities of South Carolina
and the constant effort has been to un-
rayel a snarl by %bulldozing
and methods. For q long time the adj
ministrators of the dispensary law
cared more to nourish a row in Char
lesion and thus preserve for themselves
a text upon which to make capital out
OF abuse OF Charleston than they cared
for the laws enforcement. We do not
believe that Governor Hayward has
bean moved by such base considera-
tions but we suspect that indiscreat be-
ha7i6r ON somebody's part has checked
what was at least a steady IL slowly i'm
proving situation In the states chief