The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1914-10-29

Prospective Prohibition.

Our esteemed contemporary. The Richmond
Virgnian. while protesting that it has no desire
to rattle the dry bones, is nevertheless moved
to say 'it will n.ver do for Virginians to think
that the election ends the prohibition fight in
Virginia. or rather the law-enforcement fight"
The issue is one OF the most important" adds
contemporary. that the State has
forced, and 1t is that of seeing that competent
men are chosen for Office. and are backed by
sentiment that will effectually prohibit the
production, sale and. insofar possible, the
of intoxicating liquors in Virginia"
That is an interesting statement. Does The
Virginian favor a law that will prohibit the
manufacture of all alcoholic liquors, including
wine. beer and cider? And what laws would
our contemporary propose to prevent the of
Intoxicating liquors by citizens of Virginia?
We do not ask these questions in any captious
spirit. We desire to know the temper of the
prohibition leaders. They say that the Enabling
Acts Is. not what they wanted. bat the best
that they could get. Be that as 1t may, the peo-
pie voted that measure alone-and it pro-
vides for the manufacture in Virginia of beer
and wine, and for the manufacture and sale
of cider.
I Does The virginian think that the Legisla-
ture should stick to the text of that enactment:
or that it should add to substract from It,
according the notions OF prohibitonists?
The Anti-Saioon League never asked the
legislature to pass Statewide prohibition meas
IRE, 1t emphasized the fact that II merely asked
n
the question of submission. The Legislature took
the Anti-Saloon League at its word and passed
the referendum bill And now that the bill has
passed and has been ratified by the people. what
will be the policy of the prohbitionsts? Are
we not committed a people to the referendum
as the method of dealing with the liquor traffic ?
And II the present enactment is to be amended
should not the amendments be submitted to the
vote of the people? What does The yirginian
say?
The last question is involved in the first. Many
! persons voted for prohibition for the single pur-
pose Of driving out the saloon, because The
Vrginian and other leaders insisted that the
saloon was the only issue. These voters took
no pledge to stop drinking. They do not intend
to stop drinking. They expect to purchase liquor
from licensed liquor merchants in other States
and keep it for their and the of visitin &
, friends. They do not hesitate to say so. Now
what would The Virginian do with cases like
this" What law does our contemporary pro-
pose TO prevent these of its supporters from
! drinking? Mind you. we do not say what
method, but what law?
, With the large majority of the people of Vir-
ginia committed TO the Enabling Act" there
should he little difficulty in enforcing it. We be-
a eve that the people OF this community as a
whole are going to uphold the officers OF the
law in enforcing the prohibition statute and
this newspaper will not be lukewarm in Its
:, support But there Is no provision in the enact
ment which prohibits the purchase of liquor from
beyond the borders Of the Commonwealth fol
private use and there is nothing in it to preven
purchasers from drinking 1t to their comfort, a:
Dr. Cannon would say.
The question is whether not the Legislature
will take heed to the instruction Of the people
and stick 10 the text of the law which the people
have ratified. What is the view of our contem
iporary?-paily Press.