The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-02-02
ABOUT POCKETS.


 A canadian newspaper has been in- formed that Governor Patterson. of Tennessee. has no pockets in his trous- CTS, and the editor seizes on that al- legged pecuiiarity to come out strong in favor of law or regulation pro- hibiting the hip-pocket, at least. It apparently takes the position that all the men in. the United States carry pistols in their hip-pockets, and ar gues that If there were no such re- ceptacles for them there would be an end of pistol-toting. Following that line of reasoning, it argues that the proper and effective way to deal with the concealed evil is not to allow a man to have a place to put 1t.
 That seems about the limit of pater- nalism. or regulating things. but still. as The chattanooga Times argues. "as we have .ventured upon the cxperi- ment of controlling mems appetites by law there would seem to be no req son why we should not likewise regu- late their sartorial adornments. Not one man in thousand who wears pockets in his trousers carries pis- tol. just as not one man in thousand who takes drink is a drunkard; but as we undertake to reach the drunk ard there would seem to be no reason why we should not humiliate the cour- ageous. iaw-abiding citizens in order to reach the coward who goes about with a pistol in his trousers pocket. Down with trousers pockets"
 This criticising Canadian newspaper makes two palpable errors. Tn the first place 1t apparently goes on the assumption that carrying pistols is the general and prevailing habit in the United States. Of course there is no ground for such belief, for while It is true that the habit has prevailed to greater extent than Is creditable to us as people, and it may be true that more men have thus gone armed than should have been the case. the assumption that 1t is or has been e general practice is very wide Of the truth. and the insinuatiorA is slam der against our citizenship.
 Another error of the Canadian broth CT is the apparent belief that if there were no hip-pockets there would be no concealed pistols. apparently think ing that the little gun must be car- ried at the hip or not at all. lie is ignorant of the fact, or else he wilful- ly ignores 1t that various forms and makes of the deadly revolver can be carried In the ordinary brooches pock- ct almost as easily and conveniently as pocket knife; and the further fact that many of the men who habitually carry pistols stow them away in the breast pockets of their coats. If there is no other way to prevent the pistol toting habit than by the abolition of the hip-pocket then all the other pock cts should be abolished, and the man who insists on carrying one would have to carry it in his hat. or his hand, and under Alabama's non sensical law he could not carry 6 two- foot gun in his hat, and wouldn't care to pack if in his hand.
 But there is another feature incident to this Canadian suggestion that will appeal to the enthusiastic prohibition ist. and we wonder that none of them have taken it up. The pistol is not the only thing that the hip-pocket can be conveniently used for. It is 8 nice place to carry a little flat flask or bottle, with something in it for the thirsty. A pocket that will carry a fairly large revolver will carry a small flask very nicely, with enough in it to make two or three good sized nips for those who indulge in luxuries of that kind. That's another indlct- ment against hip-pockets, and it may also hold good against all pockets, regardless of location. Plainly, while we are in the business of prohibiting and regulating we should abolish pockets of all kinds and locations.