The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1905-07-26

" ANVIL v ~
seems that Senator Tillman will in no
case be a real friend to the Prohibition
cause though he may give it nominal
adhesion.
While Senator Tillman is far more
popular than Mr.. McLaurin the latter
undoubtedly has the advantage of posi-
ton.
AS TO PROHIBITION.
If the people of Laurens desire pro-
hibition we hope they will vote for it
and get it.. If they vote prohibition
and earnestly wish what they vote for,
they will enforce it. Prohibition pro-
hibits in Marlboro county because the
people of Marlboro are merciless in
their treatment of "blind tigers" The
Tigers" are watched, they are ar
rested and they are punished severely.
Although Marlboro is a border county,
the law is observed.
Unless the Laurens prohibitionists
mean to pursue the tigers relentlessly,
year in and year out, they had best be-
ware of voting a prohibition system in
to existence to be brought into i'll re-
pute through lax administration. Pro-
hibition and free liquor would work a
vast deal of evil not only to u own
citizens but to the whole State.
In Cherokee County it seems that the
Prohibition sentiment was so strong
and so general that little difficulty has
attended the enforcement of the law.
1t seems to be fully established that
considerable Improvement in the morals
of the county is manifest in Cherokee
though the d~ispensaries were voted out
only nine months ago. State Senator
Thomas Boutwell, Butler AYERS that
crime is less frequent and that drunk
ennes in Cherokee has decreased to a
marked degree.
Half a dozen earnest and determined
and persevering prohibitionists could
make Laurens too warm for "blind til
gers" to inhabit but a thousand ~listless
and idle persons who will vote Prohibi-
tion and then go to sleep will accom-
plish nothing. If blind tigers" are
not molested they will increase and
multiply. But an active and alert sher-
if, such as Capt. Duckett, backed by a
few good men can enforce prohibition
or any other good law in Laurens
county.
NEW YORK SHOULD LYNCH.
A few days ago it transpired in New
York that several society women had
paid from So, 500 to $40, 600 for copies
of a book published from the office of
a disreputable weekly Journal in that
town. In reality the money was ex-
torted from these rich women under
threat Of slanderous publications about
them in this journal.
This could not happen in the barbar-
Gus and benighted South. The editor of
a Journal which spoke of a respectable
I'M in other than polite terms would
be quietly and decently but quickly
lynched in the usual manner and form.
He would be tarred and feathered and
otherwise duly preparation the function.
The reporters, printers and the news
dealers selling the sheet would also
be lynched though with less eclat. -
Then the printing Office would be
promptly burned.
These sundry performances would be
described by the New York newspa-
pers as anarchy" 1t is very wrong
to uphold lynching. The Matchmaking
schemes of disreputable newspapers
could be frustrated in the South with
out resort to lynching but if a newspa-
per should venture to lightly handle a
woman's good name in this region our
people would not take time to consider
the modern, improved and cunningly de-
vised methods of redress. Lynching is
easy, simple and effective.
In New York they have a reasonable
and acute horror of lynching and they
are full of kindly pity for the South
cropping in ignorance and gloom.
A woman's reputation may be blasted
by a public journal in New York and
nobody protests. In South Carolina a
woman receives protection.
In plain English, while lynching is
never justifiable the lynching system is
distinctly better than the New York
system.
AS between the license of newspa-
pers to Islander women and lynching,
lynching is the lesser evil. Neither is
permissible but New York would do
we'll to lynch with freedom and fire.
quency until her people are fitted for a
purer civilization.