The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1905-05-17
Wednesday, May II, 1905.
lis the Dispensary Doomed"

To the discussion OF the subject the News
and Courier CT the 18th devotes a column o.
its vsluab space.
II f~oretells the certain downfall OF the DIS
pensary in Pickens County, and places Spar''
anburg and Union in the list OF those Coun-
ties which in the near future will follow Inc
wake of Cherokee. 1t cites the TACT 'nat ioF
the paltry sums of some ten thousand doliafs
profit to the Counties and towns annually,
hundreds OF thousands Of the peoples money
must be spent.
Granting all this, with the Wilson act still
in force. and with the drink habit fixed on a
large per cent. of our people. does prohloitlon
or high license hold out any roseate prospecl7
The three Counties cited In the article
Picksns, Sp%artanburg and Union, are all
within easy reach OF the North Carolina line
and unquestionably will spend their hun
dred thousand a year each. with the differ
euce that the profits thereon will go to fsttel'
a debssed and degraded blind tiger element
instead OF reverting to the tax payer.
It Ia not surprising ifPickens County should
vote out the Dispensary when one considers
that 1t has taxed the vigilance Of the state
and United States authorities to keep down
Illicit distilling in that county.
A very small number Of we'll meaning, but
misguided prohibitionists linking arms with
the natural enemies OF the Dispensary would
doubtless easily make a majority vote.
From q financial stand point the State
would undoubtedly profit by Pickens County
voting prohibition.
There is authentic information to the effect
that the present cost Of suppressing Illicit
traffic in whiskey in Pickens very much ex-
ceeds the States profit on sale in that County
The article places ID arleston and Columbis
alone in the list Of Counties which would moi
vote out the Dispensary.
At the outset, the writer will at least be
asked to excuse Abbeville. and there are per
baps others.
1t is most likely that Charleston and Col
umbia would decline to vote out the DispeD.
sary, but It is for decidedly divergent reasons
The people Of Columbia are honestly trying
to enforce the law. and with the effort has
come the realization that after all, the lspen
sary system Is nearer in accord with actual
public oppinion than either prohibition OF
high license. Our people do not want the al
night bar and those who will honestly face
the fact must acknowledge that we can mol
have actual prohibition. Conditions must be
met as they are not as we would have them to
be. II all our people, or evensa majority were
prohibitionists, in fact as well as In name. II
would be immaterial what liquor lovers We
bad, or whether we had any at all or not.
Now as to Charleston. The time has been
when Charleston would have voted out the
Dispensary by q vote of something like five
to one.
That wal when an effort was being made to
enforce the Dispensary law in that city. But
the people Of the State, and the officials have
grown tired OF undertaking to uphold the
law In the face OF overwhelming public opin.
lon in favor OF free liquor. Like Ephriam OF
old, she has been given over to her idols.
1t must be acknowledged that In this one
respect she has proven herself larger than the
State.
Dispensaries languish there at a loss to tho
State, or die Of inanition. while tigers with fa'
tened, bloated but wide open eyes, thrive In
every section.