The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1905-04-28
THE BEER DISPENSERS.
Board Will Declare Itself When At
torney Generals Opinion Is
Received.


ably every beer dispenser in the state
was present on Monday morning at
the opening of the hearing held by
the state board of dispensary dlrec-
tors as to the legal status Of the beer
dispensaries. There seemed to be
general misunderstanding among the
beer dispensers as to why they were
summoned. The notices sent out
stated that they were to show cause
whv thew should not be removed tor
violation of the law. Chairman
Evans said that the dispensers were
only summoned because OF the inter-
est they might take in the legal ques-
ton which, was now before the board
the legality of the beer dispensary.
There was no specific charge against
any Of them.
Mr.. Cole. L. Blease was present and
stated that he desired to answer any
specific charge that might be pressed
against P. F. Baxter. of New5e'ry'
Mr.. w. F. Blackwood, of Spartan
burg, represented the beer dispensers
of Spartanburg. He said that with
the coming fight for prohibition IN
that county it would be bad for the
dispensary law if the beer dispensar-
les in thav county were closed. The
courts and legislature were the prop
er parties to settle any legal question
Of this kind, and he did not think the
board should take any such step as
srg5ested. For the best interests OF
the county and state the beer dispen-
saries should stay.
Mr.. Boykin. of the board. said that
as he understood ii, the only protest
or point they had heard OF was rhe
manner in which those dispensers re-
ceived their salaries and the charge
that there was drinking on the prem
ises. There was also some queSlio''
as to bottling privileges.
Mr.. Blease read a former opinion
given by Mr.. G. Duncan Rellinger as
70 opening Of casks or kegs OF beer
on premises. The opinion, Mr.. blease
said had never been reversed by law.
Mr.. Bellinger was present and ask
ed TO make a statement. He conslo-
cred the various complaints under the
following headings. As to the royal
ty paid dispensers, he said. there was
no charge against any beer dlspen-
ser present. Where royalty IS glV-
en- it is violation of the law III this
way; when beer is ordered direct from
some point out OF the state, and the
invoices simply checked up by the
state. this is violation of the law.
Mr.. Bellinger said he was trlend
! Of the law and he wished to correct
| certain errors in order that the law
NAV be put on hrmer foundatlon
AS to drinking on the premises
this was violation Of the law. He
had always ruled that beer d1spen-
sarv was just like any other kind OF
dispensary, and was governed by the
same law.
When beer is brought into the state
it should be the property Of the state,
and not the property Of the beer dis
pensary. He asked that the salaries
OF the beer dispensers be fixed, and
that it not be paid on a royalty, and
he also asked that the county boards
be asked to investigate these charges
of drinking on the premises. AS to
the bottling works and their legality
the law prescribes that bottling works
should be in cities Of 10000 inhabi
,ants and over. There was no obJec-
tion to that if the beer was bought
bv the state of South Carolina.
Mr.. Charles Marcy interrupted to
state that in Columbia the provisions
OF the law were carried out to the let
ter as regards bottling works.
Mr.. Towill, of the board, asked il
the orders given by retail dispensers
should come through Commissions,
Tatunn. This is the law
| AZ. Ma-a.. o..ni ia;rad the eala Of eHc