Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1905-08-18

Is an incident and not a purpose ir
this sale. to go where 1t is most need.
ed-that Is, into the school fund OF
the state. 1t would make no differ.
ence IL 1t went into the general fund
Of the treasury and the school FUND
increased from other sources, but thai
is a subterfuge. No one drinks any
more or patronlzes the dispensary be.
cause the profits go to the school fund
I cannot see any harm or sin in OBJ.
tanning revenue from a traffic that IL
irrepressible. The United States SUI
preme court protects each citizen ir
the right to import for his, own use
and no law Of the state can prevent
1t. The poorer and more ignorant
classes who cannot thus obtain liquor
have been and always will be supplied
through some local agency no matter
what the law against selling liquor
may be.
You quote Gov. Hoch of Kansas but
you do not discuss or explain the OFF,
cial statistics In regard to drinking and
the payment Of the United States In
.ernal revenue license by retail deal
ers In that state. There are no saloons
in South Carolina for the young to
see any more than there are in Kan
sas God forbid they should ever re-
turn. Some Of your colaborers In this
fight against the dispensary system
your allies and counsellors, are the
editors of papers which have always
fought the dispensary and are now
scheming to get high licenses after
prohibition has failed, as II will fall
There Is not civilized government ir
Christendom as far as know thai
does not derive a revenue from the sale
Of liquor and prohibition was an un-
known things so years ago. The United
States government received last yeal
from this source upwards Of $170,000,-
900. think there are only three
states at this time that cling to prohi-
bition. Iowa and Vermont had It some
years ago but they have abandoned II
for local option with the right to vote
in saloons IL wanted and that is what
Is hoped for here by your chief spon-
sors of the press.
One word more and am through:
Let US see about your historical
parallel Of the great leader who was
commanded to go down against the
Amalekites. The Hebrews Of old, true
to their instincts of thrift, slew the
abominable tribe but saved the best OF
the sheep and oxen, as some claimed
for sacrifice" and you go on to state
as an historical fact that the govern
ment Of a state was commanded by the
moral sense of the people expressed
at the ballot box to go down and de-
stroy the liquor traffic. And when
called to account It makes the pitifu
plea that while It has not destroyed
the traffic it has managed 1t 80 as tc
get money for the taxpayers" Your
parallel is not parallel at all.
The people Of South Carolina have
never instructed its government to pro-
hibit the sale of liquor. In the separ-
ate box provided by the Democratic
executive committee in the Democratic
primary Of '92. the vote stood, as I rec
ollect, $4,000 for prohibition, 25,00t
against. while $4,000 did not vote on II
at all q quote from memory. That
election was a side show and you have
no right to magnify its significance
This Is a government Of majorities and
no majority of the people has ever CIV
en- any such order. while when the
question has been passed on since d.
rectly positively a half dozen times, the
people said that the dispensary law
was a better and more sane solution
Isn't It about time to stop attending to
that election? The dispensary sys-
tenn does not rest for Its support upon
the money that It brings in. 1t rests
on the claim of It's defenders backed by
experience Of our people and statistics
as affording more protection against
the vice Of drunkenness than any 9TH
er system. prohibition or license either
II 1t has done this In spite Of NAL
administration and mismanagement
what would 1t not do II such men as
DR.. Cromer and his friends would give
to the enforcement Of the law their
great moral support? We do not ask
endorsement but in q government
where a majority rules we have had a
right to expect cooperation and as
sistance and we have not had 1t. Yet
render unto Caesar the things thai
are Caesars" was the command Of the
Master himself. When the statute has
been practically annulled by the board
Of directors, when the restrictive feat
ures have been allowed to drop into
disuse, have the prohibitionists lent
their assistance by standing up boldly
for the law? Had they done so, we
would not be now where we are.
You have been kind enough, my
dear sir, to remind me Of Jefferson's
apitaph. You declare "the people dc
not need advice but they need an OPP
portunity to vote" Allow me to re-
mind you that one Of Jefferson's
maxims which was the very embodi-
me1t of civil liberty and true Demo
cracy was. Teach the people and trust
the people"
You want the people to vote now
while they are angered and bewilder-
ed. l want them to vote "sanely" af-
ter they have heard the facts and ar
guments and I want all Of them to
vote who have an interest In this mat
ter, and under the Brice act this is
not allowed. You mentioned Win
throp and Clemson as among the
things by which would be remem-
bered. You left off some others that
I presume to add not from a sense
of egotism but simply to keep the rec
ord straight:
%. The emancipation in 1890 of
the people from dry rot, caused by
only one party and the demonstration
that we could have the most free and
open discussion OF political questions
without danger, followed by the inau-
guration of the state Democratic pri-
mary system.
(2). The constitutional convention
and its work, largely the result OF my