The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1904-02-24
LAURENS, 3. c., Feb. "a, 1904.
A False Claim Abandoned.

While the opponents OF the dispen-
sary law have declared since it's enact
ment that 1t was a revenue measure
and not "a step towards prohibition"
it was not until last week that any gen.
eral assembly was brought to concede
as much. Since the passage of the
Brice bill it will scarce be commended
hereafter by the champions of the dis
pensary thai It's first purpose is not to
raise money for the towns and counties
and schools.
Senator Brice Of York introduced q
bill permitting counties to vote dispen-
saries already established out of exist
ence. 1t was amended in the senate,
at the instance of the dispensary au-
thorities, SO that any county disestab-
fishing its dispensary shall pay a one
half mill tax on its assessed properties
to enforce the law against Illicit wbis-
key selling and SO that such q county
shall not participate in the state dis
pensary school fund further than the
constitution requires.
In short it is now the law OF South
Carolina that n county shall not pro-
hibit the sale of whiskey upon pain of
being fined three or four or five thou
sand a year, according to the amount
Of the %county's taxable property.
1t may appear reasonable that q
county that contributes nothing in
liquor revenue and whose liquor viola
tions increase on account Of the wiping
out of the liquor shops should not share
in the profits of other counties from
which liquor n are derived. If
abolition of the legal liquor shops, it
would seem fair that the county bear
the expense of detecting and furnishing
them. W. do not here even deny the
RESPONSIVENESS of the general assem-
bly's view. We merely point out that
it stamps the d~ispensary as a revenue
measure first and a reform measure,
second, il it all. II the aim of the
state were to reduce the sales Of
whiskey 1t would aid and encourage
the counties to abolish the dispensaries
whenever a county's public sentiment
as shown by it's votes justified it. The
half mill tax is based on the notion
that it will secure the enforcement Of
the law. If the law against blind tigers
be enforced as we'll without dispeusa-
ries as with then, thenthe consumption
Of liquors will be reduced by 80 mech
as the dispensaries sell. II the half mill
tax will enforce the law under a prohi-
bition or no dispeneary System in Lau-
rens as we'll as it is enforced now, the
sales of liquor will be less by the
amount OF the Laurens d~ispensary's
sales. Therefore, il the states object
were prohibition, it would be only too
glad to supply from the general state
lars for q liquor constabulary in Lau-
rens, with prohibition enforced in Lau-
rens as the gain.
Meanwhile, we think that under the
Brice law as passed acounty which sim
cerely desires prohibition will have
the opportunity ct, make good" II
the prohibltionists in this county wish
prohibition it is now cup to them" to
fight for it. Under the new law, it will
cost Lsurens about fifteen or sixteen
thousand dollars to drive out and keep
out liquor. We can have prohibition
If we will pay the price.
Since the Brice bill has been passed
let us hope that in future the claim
that the dispensary is q "moral inetitu-
ton" and that 1t is q ''step towards
prohibition" will be abandoned. 1t is
q sufficient disgrace that the state Of
South Carolina is q whiskey seller. The
passage Of the Brice law should at least
prevent the state from playing the hy-
pocrite as well. If South Carolina is
to run a grog-shop, we prefer that she
shall not run it in a pretense of holt
ness. Hypocrisy only multiplies the
shame and the people Of the state,
claiming the dispensary as a pious con-
Germ, are made to appear before the
intelligent part Of the outside world as
a community of fools besides.