Clinch Valley news. [volume] (Jeffersonville, Va.) 18??-2019, 1911-07-07
Entered Mt The Tazewcll IVA. post
Office as second class matter.
TAZEWELL. VA, JULY 7, 1911.
NOT A POLITICAL QUESTION

power 10 ruin the democratic party
in the State, and kille it as dead as
Hector. The agitation of the ques-
ton of statewide prohibition is doing
harm now, and if it is made political
issue and carries, the party will never
rally from the effects of the blow
Why should you or any party say that
any citizen shall not use liquor if he
wishes to use it? like the Clinch
Valley News. but dislike to see it
advocating such wild, impossible thing
as statewide prohibition of the liquor
traffic. READER.
At the risk of being considered dis
loyal we declare to our friend that
the possible or probable effect upon
the Democratic party of the passage
of statewide prohibition law has
never been considered or taken into
we are assured, and that is, that the
Democratic principle is destined to
live. The party so called may become
extinct as an organization, but the
principles of Democracy will! live so
long rs the sermon on the Mount is
preached and believed, or the Golden
Rule Incorporated into the lives and
conduct of men. There has been Il
great deal of talk for the past forty
years of the death of the Democratic
party, but it is still here, and very
much in evidence, and will still exer-
else, in the future, as in the past, a
powerful influence in the government
of the world. However, if the sup
preston of the liquor traffic will kill
the Democratic party it must be that
the traffic in some way enters into the
life and foundation stones of the
party. If this be so, then the sooner
the party dies the better for the race
Our friend is mistaken. The question
of statewide prohibition is right or
wrong, not because any politica party
favors or opposes it, but upon purely
economic, moral and relgiousgrounds.
If the sale of liquor, opium, morphine
and other deadly and destructive
drugs is good thing for the people,
then, by all means let these be sold
openly and freely. If they are an evil
and dangerous and destructive should
they not be stopped-. Wouid Of.
friend object to law prohibiting the
sale of opium and morphine freely
over the counters of our stores? OF
course not. Does he uphold or con-
denim the law which forbids the sale
of opium or morphine except under
rigid restrictions? Certainly not.
&hy not? Because, evidently. these
drugs are dangerous, enslaving and
deadly. Well, liquor is also. 1t en-
slaves, kills and destroys ten times
as many people as these drugs doc. If
it is right to prohibit one deadly drug
why not another and a worse one? We
repeat what we have said heretofore
that man has right to drink liouor
or take or do anything else he chooses
so long as he does not int rfere in so
doing with the rights and privileges
of others. But this is not question
of drinking, but of selling. No man.
says the highest court in the land
has any right to sell liquor. He does
so only because the people grant him
the privilege. They have the right to
grant or not to grant, as they choose
We do not say that liquor should not
be manufactured and sold under prom
er restrictions, but our contention h IS
always been, that liquor should not be
ooiN 90 INV, III al UIeD Saloon, under
conditions which enlarge the tempta-
ton to drink, and afford free, omen
easy opportunity for forming the
drink habit. Prohibition of its mann
facture and sale and prohibition of
its shipment. through express COM
panies into dry territory where a ma
jority of the voters have said they 10
not want it, would certainly lessen
the opportunity and temptation to
drink. Like the law lslinst crime. il
would not prevtpt crime entirely, but
would lessen its frequency. If the
people want statewide prohibition
thcy should have it, and we are heart.
lily ~ favor Of trying it, and let the