Americus times-recorder. [volume] (Americus, Ga.) 1891-current, 1911-08-26
HIGH LICENSE, STRICT REGUL4.
TION AND RIGID ENFORCE.
MENT MIGHT BE BETTER.

/ iHLp TIE SUDt4 AdLOl4di IdCt W III nat
urally provoke considerable discussion
as to the relative merits of statewide
prohibition, local option, and state
wide license, in restraining the mani
fold evils that flow from the immoder-
ate use OF liquors.
Theoretically. the absolute prohibit
ton of the manufacture and use Of
intoXicants appears irrefutabIe. Bat
there never has been a time in the his
tory of civilization, it would seem,
when absolute prohibition was OBJ
tainable. Prohibition as it exists in
this state is very far from being pro-
hibition. Prohibition that permits Of
the establishment Of near-beer sa-
looms, under license. in which all kinds
OF liquors are retaiIed, and that per
mits of the existence Of breweries
that manufacture the old style beer
right along, is in reality a pretence.
At the same time it does permit COM
munittes where the prohibition sent
ment is strong to root out the traffic to
much greater degree than would
otherwise be the case. The shipment
in from other communities and states
of whiskey and other liquors neutral
| ICES such efforts to a considerable ex-
tent. However, the trouble to which
people are put to secure liquor from a
distance doubtless does have a great
effect in diminishing its continued use.
If it were not so the liquor manufac-
.turers would not be so anxious to do
away with prohibitory laws.
From the standpoint of the old Dem
ocratic party, that has in the past con-
sistently opposed sumptuary laws If
AN kind, local option is the correct
poll y Local option theoretically
gives to each county the right to say
whether it shall be dry or wet. If the
liquor interests We're willing to abide
by such decisions local option would
be immeasureably stronger than it is.
But the tendency OF liquor men has al
ways been TO override public senti-
ment, to consider themselves above
the law, and to ignore local feeling or
state statute. The benefits of a local
option system are neutralized by the
liquor people, just as are the benefits
that prohibitionists ascribe to their
policy
II there could be rigid supervision
high license, proper enforcement Of
the law, and protection for the rights
of dry counties, local option would ap-
peal to many thousand who are not
prohibitionists but who are opposed
to a return TO the old saloon system
and its iniquities. But the very lead
ers Of the local option fight would
probably oppoes laws of this kind, and
the liquor dealers would be the first 20
ignore and defy them
If Georgia could adopt and enforce
some such system as is found in some
Northern states, with notifications 20
meet its peculiar conditions, it would
probably be an improvement on the
existing system. We venture to sum-
Marie some suggestions along this
line, as follows:
| Q High license by cities, with the
state fixing the same, say $1,000 for
towns under 10000, $1,000 for towns
between 10000 and 10000, and $4,000
for places having over 10000 people
A uniform state license of $500. This
would hold down the number of places
selling liquor and make their proprie,
tors more careful about observing the
laws.
(2) All licenses to be issued only
after applications have been advertised
thirty days, SO as to afford the public
the right Of protest.
CD No man of bad character, OF
who has ever been convicted of fell
ony to be granted a license.
(4 All licenses revocable, without
compensation, for violation of any Of
the regulations, with the right of re-
license withdrawn for FIVE years.
/ o. Hours of sale limited to from :
a. m. to 3 p. m, sales to women and
minors prohibited, as well as to any
one showing the effects Of liquor.
CO. Shipments from a wet county t.
i a dry county prohibited under severe
penalties. If possible express and
uansportion companies prohibited
from accepting such shipments.
O. Soliciting orders in a dry county
prohibited under a twelve months term
on the chain gang.
CS) Mayors of cities and towns
made removable by the governor for
failure to enforce the liquor laws 81
the state.