Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1911-07-25
The Near Beer Question.

: The old dispensary law prohibited
the sale, under other than dispensary
regulations of any beverage that con-
tanned alcohol and the present law pro-
hibits in the same manner the sale Of
any beverage that will intoxicate II
used TO excess.
1t is in this difference that Mayor
Duncan of Union bases defense Of
himself and his city council for licens-
ing the sale of near beer in Union.
In long statement given out to the
press a few days ago, Mayor Duncan
says that when he went into office he
found a number of people selling near
beer" which upon careful investiga-
ton, he found to be a beverage that
was very close to lager in appearance,
taste, odor and other characteristics;
but which would not intoxicate If
drank to excess.
After thorough consideration Of the
whole matter, the mayor and council
decided that it would be as good an
idea as any to license dealers at the
rate of $3.50 a quarter or $50 year;
but to give them to understand that If
they should sell anything stronger they
would be pulled and prosecuted.
Some of the people, who according to
the mayor, had been paying under
previous administration, decided to
pay the license and stopped selling the
beer. Others paid and continued to
sell as they had been doing.
The mayor takes pains to put him
self down as a good citizen, who would
not disobey the law under any consid-
Grafton or permit anybody else to do
anything of the kind. And maybe he
thinks he is entirely honest in his es-
innate of himself.
In the consideration of this matter,
some strange things occur to us and
called does not come under the prohi-
bition of the dispensary law, where
would the city council of Union find
power to prohibit its sale without q
license, and why should those people
who are alleged to have stopped SELL
ing because they did not want to pay
the license have done so at all.
OF course the city council Of Union
has a right to license any and all kinds
of businesses; but to assume the right
to specialize and license such a sus-
picious business as this looks like
getting dangerously close to the line.
AS to what near beer" really is, we
do not know but we feel convinced
that it is the real article, with only the
name near" tackled on as a kind Of
subterfuge, and while we have no doubt
that every near beer" dealer keeps q
lot of bitter, non alcoholic stuff on
hand to sell on occasion, we suspect
that most would be customers who fail
to get genuine Budweiser, Schlitz or
sometime else equally interesting,
consider themselves as having been
humbugged and fail to come back.
Maybe they do it otherwise in Un-
ion, but we have an idea that most
dealers who would put themselves in a
position to be generally considered as
in the regular beer business would
hardly be satisfied to continue in that
position without the profits that usu-
ally accrue from the traffic.
In giving expression to this view,
we do not feel as if we are telling
anybody anything they do not know.
We are satisfied that nine readers out
of ten find it difficult to repress smiles
and winks as they consider the stua-
ton.
But is it not strange that people
should be willing to be so dishonest
with themselves i'm any kind of q
transaction?
"Neer beer" the idea. Isn't it
great joke though"