Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1908-12-15
CHRISTENSEN ON PROHIBITION.
Broad and Practical View Of Trou-
blesome Question.

bleSorne QUESTION.
Senator Christensen Of Beaufort,
one Of the active workers in the state
senate, and who Is one Of the coming
men of the state, was invited to attend
the recent caucus of the Prohibition
lists in Columbia, after he had written
the superintendent Of the Anti-Saloon
League that he was not in full sympa-
thy with a statewide prohibition law.
Among the things he said in his letter
to Rev. j. L. Harley Is the following:
II do not know that you would con-
slider me a Prohibitionist. 1 am To-
cal optionist. OF course one can be
both.
This phase Of the liquor question
was not discussed in the campaign in
which l was renominated to the SEN
ate, and l am not pledged or in any
way committed to my constituency as
between local option and statewide
prohibition. Personally have always
been a teetotaler and wish to do what
can to bring the day when liquor
shall no longer be used. So / pre-
sumo some would call me a Prohibi-
ZIONIST But 1 believe that we can es-
tablish an enforced prohibition sooner
through local option and through state
wide prohibition.
Il congratulate you and your organi-
zation on the work you did for prohibi-
ton in Union, Clarendon, Chester and
other counties where the question has
come up for decision at the ballot box.
The work Of the Anti-Saloon league,
as l have known Of it through the
press, seems to me to be one Of the
hopeful signs Of the times. But
think that in this state at this time
our common object can be soonest OBJ
tanned through county movements.
1T may be possible to pass state
prohibition bill at the coming session
Of the legislature, but you can not Sc
cure at present in many Of the coun-
ties an enforcement that will help mat
ters. The counties are the units and
they should be won over. Spartanburg
makes a success Of prohibition because
she has a public sentiment that will
convict a prominent citizen Of Illegal
liquor selling in Is minutes, as was
done last week. But what Of us who
will not convict on any evidence? We
don't need more laws, We need ref
ormation. We can not be driven, we
must be convinced. This Is a slower
course, but it is, believe surer
B1e."
Senator Christensen also gave out
the following statement:
1.-The prohibition leaders point with
pride and satisfaction to the good ef-
fects Of prohibition in twenty-one dry
counties in this state. These results
are the results Of local option prohibi-
ton. They are the basis Of the faith
we local option Prohibitionists have
in reformation as opposed to the pro-
posed coercion of the statewide Pro-
hibitionists. The people Of these new
dry counties made up their minds grad
ually that it would be best for them
selves to stop legalized liquor selling
in their counties, and they stopped 1t
and like the results. But If, before
they had been educated up to that
point the people of other sections Of
the state through the Legislature or a
statewide vote, had forced them to
take that action the results would be
very different.
Counties in the southern and eastern
portion Of the state are being educa-
ted up to prohibition, and under local
option will, believe, vote liquor out
in the next few years. But If 1t Is at
tempted to force them through state
wide law, the growth Of prohibition
sentiment will be checked, and juries
and local officials will not attempt to
enforce the obnoxious measure.
Prohibition is winning its way
under local option. Every gain is a
healthy gain. Why give 1t up? Why
Is it not wiser for the eloquent, able
and public spirited workers for prohi-
bition who went into Laurens, Chester
and Clarendon and helped educate
their citizens up to the point where
they reached out and took prohibition
why Is 1t not wiser for them to con-
tinue this successful fight rather than
turn from that plan Of campaign and
begin an attempt to coerce? They
have succeeded in leading, but can they