The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1909-09-01
A Question Of Law.

line, short note appeared in the AS
sociate Reformed Presbyterian that did
me injustice and misrepresented the
facts characterizing the meeting.
Rev. O. Y. Bonner, one of the ed
itors of the Presbyterian, challenged
statement that l had made there pub
lcly, despite the fact that produced
positive proof that my statement was
correct. I sought to reply to the ar
ticle in the Presbyterian, through its
own columns, in rs respectful language
as could command, and | was coolly
denied this privilege.
can not conceive, even of a secular
paper so grossly violating all the rules
of Journalism as to refuse TO print
reply to it's own editorial comment !;
and for religious or church paper to
close its colu.0ns rather than admit
the truth, is simply beyond compre-
hension. If Mr.. Bonner was correct
in the position he assumed at Zarline.
the record would sustain him. II he
was incorrect IN his position, candor
and fairness make it imperative that
he acknowledge his error, even if it is
too late to repair the effect OF his
speech.
1t seems that the Presbyterian opens
its columns only to those of its way OF
thinking. This is one way TO be al
ways right. 1t is the way of,the des-
pot, but it is little unusual in repub.
lie of free institutions.
lam driven to the necessity of asking
that you print my reply to the editorial
of the Presbyterian, which feel sure
YOU will do, with the facts thus ex-
planned. You may not always be
right, but you are always fair.
Jno. r. Blake.
notice the following statement of
Mr.. Robt. Galloway in the last issue of
the A. r. Presbyterian. of which be is
the local editor, in reference TO the
speaking at Zarline on the 18th inst.
"Following these two addresses Mr..
John Blake of Abbeville was intro
duced and made long speech for the
dispensary. The points were weak.
Mr.. Blake was cheered by his sympa-
thizers. Rev. o. Y. Bonner followed
him, and when he got through, there
was not as much as a thread LETT OF
Mr.. Blake's arguments. With discus
sions like this throughout the county,
the fate of the dispensary would not
be hard to foretell."
1t Is not a matter of vital importance
to me as to Mr.. Galloway's opinion OF
nv speech. 1t is fact, however, that
of the only three county clubs which
voted TO retain the dispensary in the
last election two, Keowee and Bryart's
Cross Roads, in whose midst the speak
~, Il -Dfal n a N IN Y,
for it, and possibly had my points"
been lit lie weaker" they would have
gone horsefoot and dragoon for it. But
as it was, however, Keowee gave 43
votes for the dispensary and "A votes
against it, Bryant's Cross Roads gave
"a votes for the dispensary and Is votes
against it.
I submit that this vote shows that
the audience sustain me rather than
Mr.. Bonner Mr.. Galloway is no
doubt correct in saying with discus
sions like this throughout the county
the fate of the dispensary would not
be hard to foretell" In representing
any sort of a newspaper, it is univer-
sally conceded that an editor should be
governed more by facts than by the
expression of personal feelings or par
tizan prejudice.
The Press and Banner has the fol-
lowing notice of the same meeting:
"Mr. John r. Blake was The only
champion oe the dispensary present,
and when introduced proceeded to lay
on Macduff in g cd Shakesperian
style. He threw q bomb into the au-
dience when he read that part Of the
new law that forbids any person to
keep in his possession any Kind Of
whiskey in the State Mr.. Blake
spoke for nearly an hour and was fol.
lowed by Rev. o. Y. Bonner. At the
outset of Mr.. Bonner's talk, he denied
that part of the law read by Mr..
Blake as to the keeping of whiskey in
possession, saying that it was not so,
only ruse, intimating that a man
could keep it in his house if he 80 de-
sired, and so legally"
Now, Mr.. Editor, there is clearly a
question of veracity between Mr.. Bon
ner and myself. as to the restrictions
of the prohibition law.
1 stated that the law was too dras-
tic. That it prohibited any person
from keeping IN his possession wine
or spirituous liquors. That wine could
only be bought for sacramental pur-
poses by minister or the officers OF
the church.
Mr.. Bonner in reply said, my
friends, he is fooling you. That is not
the law. 1t does not prohibit keeping
wine in your possession" or words to
that effect.
Here is the law, let the public de-
eide who tried to fool the people.
Sec. l. That it shall be unlawful for
any person, firm, corporation or asso-
citation within this State to manufaC-
ture, sell, barter, exchange, receive,
accept. give away to induce trade, de-
liver, store, keep in possession in the
State any spirituous malt.
vinous, fermented, brewed, or other
liquors and beverages.
sec. I. That it shall be unlawful to
sell wine for sacramental purposes ex-
cept to a minister, pastor, priest or
regular cons tituted officers Of a regu-
larly organized religious congregation
or church.
This is the law. Now, who's fooling
the folks. Ask the voters of KeOwee
and Bryant's Cross Roads.