The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1913-08-16
DISPENSARY OR NO DISPENSARY,

own free will and accord?
II will be the duty of the voter to
consider well the many sides of the
case before he votes at all. The
prohibitionist claims No, means. and
will bring about no dispensary, no
ence, total, eventually. Do you be-
lieve it? Do you believe that if you
were able to vote No, a thousand
times, you could break up a luxury
INDUCED in by the race for many
generations. A habit as old as re-
ligion, attendant with similar consol-
ations and similar disasters to the hu-
man race. Every innovation of mems
religious beliefs and endeavors to die
tate to him what God he shall wor-
ship, or what FORMS etc, he shall in.
dulge in, or should not practice, has
resulted in wars, deaths, and disas-
ter to every generation. Almost every
book in the Bible from Genesis to
Revelations, is tragedy, where tribe
on account of religion anu even in this
enlightened age we would back up
missionaries with the sword to make
the Chinaman embrace Christianity.
Fanatics commence it, who for
awhile hold their sway, until another
fanatic comes along to promulgate a
new idea. You will find not one
scientific principle has ever emanat-
ed from a fanatic.
Take the liquor question; the man
ufacture and sale, and drinking of it
in one form or another has been in
existence for as many generations as
religion, and like it has been attend
ed with consultations, pleasures, and
disasters. and similarly each innova-
ton debating how it shall be sold, or
how man should drink it, CT that he be
prohibited from drinking it a. all;
has resulted in trouble, disaster, and
bloodshed, especially the dispensary
system, and worse the bind tiger sys.
tenn.
1t is futile to try and regulat te
mans appetite or his religion, out
wardly he may profress abstinence
while privately he gratifies his appe-
tite. Outwardly he may profess great
religion through policy. while pri-
vately he INDUCES in all that his re-
ligion forbids.
Some business men will vote No,
believing that the class of men who
spend money for whiskey would have
more money to spend for their goods.
Others will vote Yes, because they be-
lieve that the dispensary will draw
more people and their indulgence will
cause them to spend more money.
The prohibitionist will vote No, be-
cause they think all men can, and
must do without it as they do, who
find no consolation, good, or pleasure
In 1T. l think these are the chief
reasons governing these three voters
The first is voting No, from sell
hsh motive. The second is voting
Yes. from an absolutely selfish mo-
tive, neither caring for the welfare
of his fellow citizen. The third is, ]
believe. sincere in believing he can,
by voting No. prevent the use of it,
and benefit men. But if he will lift
the curtain he will find often selfish
ness and Dog in the Manger" spirit
behind it.
There Is another voter who will
vote Yes. from purely business
standpoint. which is that all will be
benefited by the revenue obtained
thereby from population we do not
now get ANY from as they pay no
taxes There is another voter who
Will vote Yes because he believes it to
be better than the blind tiger or the
country club; better for all such
things to be under police surveillance.
Take these voters; the first who votes
No. forgets that if the men cannot
| SSt ~ ioiii ulSpenSdTy tncy VIII ma
thousand other ways to get it. The
second voter votes Yes; he overlooks
the fact that it may cost him more
I'm the finish on account of enforcing
law and order, and he paying for it.
The third votes No. he is a fanatic.
he cannot have prohibition, total alb
stinance he cannot dictate or force
every man to think and do as he does.
Ihey are too extreme, these men,
no matter how good their intentions
are. should pursue other means TO
stop the evil habit of drinking, than
10 endeavor to forge and enact laws to
force the educated and ignorant.
| strong and weak, old and young alike.
1epriving one of pleasure, one of
comfort, some of necessity. and maxi