The Lexington dispatch. [volume] (Lexington, South Carolina) 1870-1917, 1907-07-31

That is, it would be better to BRING
this dangerous thing right in the town
rather than leave it over in Columbia.
I do not know of any such principle.
I find it a rule everywhere that the
further off danger is the better it IS
for you. If the lightning strikes, the
further off it is the better it is for you.
If there is battle, the further Oft it
is from you the better it is for you.
If there is whiskey, the further off it
is from you, the better it is for you.
So then. it is better for Brookland to
have whiskey over in Columbia than
in Brookland. 1t is true she may
have to endure some ''drunks," but
she will not be responsible for them,
and she will have clean breast to
punish them. However, it would tie
still better for Brookland if there
were no whiskey in reach.
Some people say if there is money
in the whiskey business we ought to
have it. do not know of any Ian
guage strong enough to express my
disdain for such philosophy. Why
ought we to have the profits of the
whiskey money? Is it because we de-
serve it on account of our valuable
service in::handing out whiskey. do
not believe that anybody deserves
anything for handing out whiskey.
If no profits are deserved in the whis-
key business, then we have no right
to any profits. The man who says
whiskey ought to be sold simply be-
cause there is profit in. the form of
money, ought to hang his head with
shame.
! I believe that all who defend ands
assist the dispensary take part in all
the crimes caused by dispensary whis-
key. In 1st Timothy, a:22 we read:
ssNeither be partakers in other mems
SINS" The immediate reference is
to the. ordination of presbyters. If
you hastily send forth man to preach
the Gospel and he prove unfit, you
take part in all of his sins. Now so it
is with whiskey. If you send forth
man with bottle of whiskey, you
take part in all the sins it may cause
hin to commit. If Brookland places
whiskey in the hands Of her people,
she takes part in all the sins which
this whiskey causes them to commit.
Now, how can Brookland punish her
people for drunkenness when she is to-
some extent responsible for their
drunkenness-When she placed the
whiskey in their hands on which to
get drunk? When the Mayor of the
town tries man for getting drunk
on this whiskey, he should not only
find him guilty, but he should also
find himself guilty. It is impossible
to sell whiskey and at the same time
get rid of the responsibility of selling
it.
Again we are told that when the
State handles whiskey, the evil results
of it are diminished, but I do not be-
ieve it. This makes the whiskey
business a legal business, and at the
same time gives it the endorsement.of
the State. 1t: now has show of re-
spectabi1ity and will trap more men
than it would otherwise. Church peo-
pie often think they can serve on
county boards; church people often.
think they can work in dispensaries;
church people often think they can
buy whiskey and in this way more
people are injured. Any system
which takes the whiskey business and
gives it a show of respectability,
makes it more dangerous. If you
make dangerous bridge look sound,
it will deceive, more people than if
left alone.
Then there is another man defend
ing whiskey called the "Blind Tiger''
man and I believe he is the most un-,
gladly man of them all. He buys his
whiskey contrary to the law, sells it
contrary to the law, causes people to
buy it contrary to the law, and at the
same time takes part in all the evil
caused by his whiskey. In the words
of Shakespeare: "If men were to be
saved by merit, what hole in hell
were hot enough for him?"
But let no drunkard think that in
holding those responsible who sell the
whiskey, he becomes free of respon-
sibility. First Corinthians, $40,
(where it is said no drunkard shall
enter into the Kingdom of God),
ought to make things plain enough
for him.