The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1905-08-18

debauched. because OF the laN admin
;stration or NAL administration proves
nothing. Pope long since epl;omlzea
this whole subject in that we'll known
couplet:
about forms OF law, let fools con-
test,
That law which is best admins
tered is best
And our not agreeing on the dis
pensary question and the liquor ques-
ton comes from the fundamental
difference of opinion as to how 1t IS
best to police the liquor traffic. Inc
p1ohibitionists declare it is sinful to
drink in moderation wine or wh1skey,
while a large majority Of us cannot
see any foundation in morals or re-
ligion for any such contention. livery
BODY recognizes the evil OF drunken
ness.and how to minimize this or
TO prevent it, is the whole question.
You say prohibit the sale. l say sell
bv bonded officers under stringent
regulations in the day time only and
have the law enforced The profit,
which is an incident and not pur-
pose in this sale, to go where it IS
most necded-that is, into the school
fund of the state. 1t would make no
difference if it went into the general
fund of the treasury and the school
fund increased from other sources,
that is subterfuge No one drinks
any more or patronizes the dispen-
sary because the profits go to the
school fund. I can not see any harm
or sin in obtaining revenue from a
traffic that is irrcpressible. The Unit
ed States supreme court protects each
citizen in the right to import for his
own use, and no law of the state can
prevent it. The poorer and more
IGNORANT classes who can not 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 OF explain
the official statistics in regard to
drinking and the payment of the Unit
ed States internal revenue license by
retail dealers in that state. There
are no saloons in South Carolina for
the Young to see any more than there
are in Kansas. God forbid they
should ever return. Some of your
colabore7s in this fight against the
dispensary system, your allies and
counsellors, are the editors OF papers
which have always fought the dlspen-
sarv and are now scheming to get
high licenses after prohibition has
failed. as it will fail. There is not
civilized government il Chrlsten-
dom as far as I know that does not
| derive revenue from the sale Of
liquor and prohibition was an un-
known thing 90 years ago. The Unit
ed States government received last
wear from this source upwards OF
S1zo,oooooo. I think there are only
three states at this time that cling
to prohibition. Iowa and Vermont
had it some years ago but they have
abandoned it for local option with
the right to vote in saloons if wanted
and that is what is hoped for here by
YOUR chief sponsors OF the press.
One more word and I 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 abonlinable tribe bur 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 government Of a state was COM
manded by the moral sense OF the
people expressed at the ballot box
to go down and destroy the liquor
traffic. And when called to account
it makes the pitiful plea that while