The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1914-09-08
TUNES INsiNCERE IDEA


or MORAL REFoRMERs' -" SINCERITY. /
The length to which the Times-Dispatch will go
In its fight for the continuance OF the lieehSeu
ffuuor traffic, from which 1t derives large ad'ei-
tissng revenue, is humiliatng 10 those VINO OK
DEC, to SEE newspapers meet issues squarely ana
deal fairly with their opponents PREACHING ~
It's Sunday edition on Moral Reformers Shouiu
Not Be Insincere," the 7imeSDtspdfch says 'i'aI !
.1he advocates of Statewide prohibition cannot
purge themselves of the charge OF lhsihcef'H
and "that the terms of the Enabling Act are PROOF
snon9h nj prohibition insincerity" In the course
-. editorial the Times 4spatch uses this lam
guage;
.The advocates Of Statewide prohibition 90
mi as they must if they are sincere seek
az .o1a, abolition of liquor production in tins
state In Q palpable attempt TO play pollFs'
"a pIacate opposition and get votes Inc authors
OF the Enabling Act inserted clause pro''olhs
that firms now manufacturing wine are 10 con-
ssn4a non.olested and So too, are the brewers
Of beer containing not more than IL per cent
OF alcahct A poison is a poison, no ies" IN WIZ
or beer than In whskey and brandy: III 1t be
wrong 10 manufacture one. 1t must be wrong TO
manufacture the others. Moral reformers are
properly expected to be above immoral truck
ling pte-catchng lodges at the expense Oh
their moral convictions
1t would be difficult 10 crowd more OF misrepre-
sentation in paragraph of the same length than
the paragraph quoted above contains The state
mems made are both false and unjust. and the
Times suatch knows that they are. The
Enabling Act as offered IN the House of Delegates
BY Judge Martin Williams expressed the desires
on the anti-Saloon League, by which the fight for
Statewide prohibition has been made. was clean
cut. and provided for the total abolition OF
LIQUOR production In this State
The bill passed the House Of Delegates In salts
factory shape. and 1t was in the Senate commit
tee that those who opposed Statewide prohibi-
tion insisted upon the insertion OF amendments
cxempting the manufacture of wine and pro-
vtding that the ballot should read For State
wide Prohibition" and For Local Option" The
temperance leaders were plainly told that unless
these amendments, and one or two others, were
accepted, the bill could not be gotten through
the Senate The Anti-Saloon League had fought
for years to secure from the General Assembly
the right for the people to vote on the question
Of continuing to license the saloon in the State.
They were forced to accept from the Senate COM
10 them, and which they declared at the time
were not satisfactory to get any bill at all
There was no 'palpable attempt to play politics,
to pIacate opposition. and get votes" The Times
Dispatch knows that there was no such attempt
Nor did 'the authors of the Enabling Act insert
clause providing that firms now manufacturing
wine are to continue unmolcs.ed." The Times
Dispatch know that this statement is not true,
and Its adrois further statement so. too are the
brewers of beer not containing more than three
aud half per cent Of alcohol" is plainly designed
70 indicate that the temperance people were re-
sponsble for this amendment when the Times
Dispatch knows that such is not the case. If it
does not know. there is no excuse for its
ignorance.
The Tinaes~Dtspotrh which used all of It's in
Auence to prevent the Anti-Saoon League from
securing the passage OF such bill As 1t desired.
indeed Of any bill providing for vote on this
question, further knows that leaders Of the dry
forces frankly stated when the bill passed the
Senate that If the people OF the State voted for
Statewide prohibition it their purpose as 1t
still liz their purpose. to have the prohihiiiye
law made to apply to the manufacture of wine
and of beer as we'll Of other products con-
tanning alcohol There was neither concealment
nor deception on the part Of the dry leaders They
made their fight for clearcut bill and took
the best that they could get from Senate,
erai OF whose members were led to vote for the
/ Bill because they realized that to do otherwise
would misrspresent the wishes Of the great
majority OF their constituents.
The Ttmes-Dispotch has always fought legis-
htion against the liquor trafific. 1t opposed
the original local option law, which 1t
10 earnestly champions; 1t opposed the Mann
and then the Byrd Law. both OF which 1t now pro-
fesses 10 regard as efficient and desirable stat
utex 1t opposed the Enabling Act in season
and out OF season, and 1t was despite its opposi-
ION and that Of the liquor interests strongly en-
Preached in the Virginia Senate that the En-
\ abling Act. even amended by It's enemies in the
a1siieulars which the TtmesDisDatch would now
s&@s ~