Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1910-07-22

umnS to show that Mr.. FeatherStOne
is inconsistent in that he once advo-
Gated local option and now stands for
tate-wide prohibition. We are not
very much impressed by the States
arguments, and we don't think the
State is either. We rather see in the
situation that the State realizes full
well that Mr.. Featherstone is the real
anti-liquor candidate, and the man
who must he licked out of the second
primary to give the other fellows
show. Our contemporary position is
a little bit embarrassing to itself
though. 1t knows full well that Mr.
Featherstone is a very able man OF
high purposes, and that he is in no
sense q crank. 1t would much prefer
to see him in the governors chair than
MIR. Blease, for instance, and for that
reason it is Just a little hampered.
But there is nothing inconsistent in
Mr.. Featherstones political record
He has understood all along that states
and counties partake in large measure
uals. When the state was sodden with
dispensary liquor, he understood how
absurd it would be to appeal to it as
whole to come back to decency. He
knew that there was no way to get at
tention except by appealing to the m
dividual counties to stand for the right
of having a say whether they should
have prohibition or continue in the
way they were going. The idea won
after a long fight. But just as an in
dividual who has once been addicted
to the use of liquor reforms and goes
back to drink, so counties and states
are liable to the same danger. The
state is now prohibition with the eN-
ception of six large counties. There is
still a large minority of liquor people
in each of the dry counties. Mr. Feath-
erstone understands very well that II
things are allowed to continue as they
are, with the majority sentiment lulled
to sleep maybe in the fanceid security
6f better conditions, there is danger
that the element which looks to the
dispensary for political prestige, may
again ride to power Oh the still gnaw-
ing appetites that once guaranteed
their supremacy. The only sale
thing. he understands full well, is
to outlaw liquor entirely in every
county and to make the return OF the
legal sale of liquor impossible, except
on a majority vote of the people of the
state. The Columbia State is for local
option on exactly the same principle
that Mr. Feathcrstone was for local
option, except that it wants a different
thing. Mr.. FeatherStone has always
been for prohibition. and is for prohi-
bition now. The Columbia State has
always been for liquor and is for Ii
quor now. The Columbia State wants
local option in Richland, because it
knows that local option will ensure the
sale of liquor in Columbia. If 1t
thought local option would drive liquor
out of Columbia, it would be opposed TO
local option. Mr.. Featherst"ne stood
for local option as means OF driving
liquor out of great many counties
that could not get rid Of it in any 9TH
er way, and if he had not believed that
local option would have had just the
result it did have, he would not have
stood for it, He feels now that all but
thirty-siX counties are right and he
wants to make them all right. He is
really not worried So much about the
six, as he is about the thirty-siN. He
is afraid that the law which has served
to run whisky into such close quar-
ter, may eventually work backward
and put whisky in the aScendancy
again. But the Columbia State under
stands all this as well as Mr.. Feather
stone does, and while we are willing
To admit that both are fighting for Il
principle, we are not willing To admit
that local option is involved i'm that
principle in the slightest. except as
means to an end. The Columbia state
is fighting to uphold the liquor husi-
ness. and Mr.. FeathcrSt"ne is fighting
to put it down.