The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1909-07-30
PROHIBITIONIsTS AND
PROHIBITIONISTS.
DR.. Cromer Asks a Number Of More
or Less Pertinent Questions.

VI ASSS = VI G4AS1AG VACSV4S0o.
T. the Editor of the News and
Courier: In an editorial this morning
Won say:
DIR. Cromer tells us that he is a
local option Prohibitionist:' so are
We
It would be interesting to have you
tell your readers just what you mean
by $50 are We
Also, you say that you are local
option Prohibitionist and that the
blind tigers in Charleston are local
option Prohibitionists. Are We to in
fer that you will vote against prohi-
bition because the blind tigers are for
it? Besides, speaking Of facts, how
do you know that the blind tigers are
now local option Prohibitionists?
4 few years ago the charge was
made that prominent politician had
said that the preachers were in league
with the blind tigers and the devil in
order to defeat the dispensary, his
purpose being to discredit the opposi-
ton to the dispensary. But the dis
pensary was defeated. Do you think
that your repeated assertion that the
blind tigers arr Prohibitionists will
di>credit prohibition and cause sensi-
bic men to surrender their honest con-
victionS? Shall I vote against what I
believe to be right, merely because l
find that a man of low motives is
voting for the same thing?
I did not mean for my hearers to
infer that in Charleston they put
blind tigers on the grand jury, and l
distinctly emphasized the remarkable
fact that the present grand jury is
complaining that the city authorities
do not enforce the liquor laws. [ have
no idea that the bright saying that L
was quoting was intended to be taken
literally: take it for granted that it
was simply intended to contrast two
cities. in one of which public Sentl-
ment enforced the law, and IN the
other of which it did not.
Bat why quibble over a word or,
phrase@o Was it not notorious a few
years ago that Charleston grand juries
refused to find true bills against blind
tigers? So far as enforcing the liquor
law was concerned, would conditions
have been any more favorable to vio-
lators of law if the grand juries has
been made up Of blind tigers?
You used the word "tax-dodging, Z"
not I. But I say of the proper+v-
owners of Charleston precisely Wit
I say Of those Of Newberry: If they
are going to resort to the liquor traffic
to get the revenue to run thair gov
ernment and support their schools
rather than pay taxes for these OBJ
jects. then they are not worthy t.
have either children or schools. O1r
citizens Of the next generation are 60
inc to be no higher than the ideals
that We fix for the children Of this
generation.
Again, speaking Of "facts," is it
true that there are $40 blind tigers in
Charleston, and that they are fined
$50 quarterly, the fine being in the
nature Of license fee? do not
state that as a fact, but have heard
it stated as a fact. If it is fact, the
taxpayers to whom you appeal should
have very tender regard for these
blind tigers, for they also are helping
10 reduce the rate of taxation.
You get comfort out Of my argu-
ment that the people should pay taxes
enough to support the Government; ;
and you expect the people to be in
Auenced in the election by the fear
that if the dispensary is voted out,
they will have to pay more taxes on
their millions or taxes on more OF
their millions. Would you mind pub
fishing the amount Of money on de-
post in the banks Of Charleston on
the first Of January, and the amount
of cash listed for taxation? | do not
say as a fact that there are tax
dodgers in Charleston. Do you say as
a fact that there are not?
Geo. B. Cromer.
Newberry, July %.