The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1917-12-18
N, P|R|AG RESULTS
Continued from Pare T-hree.l

Continued from Page Three
the trial OF cases brought by them &c
court
A table is furnished showing iu
detail the number of prosecutions our.
ing the year by counties and cities,
whether or not the cities were pre-
vlously wet or dry. together with the
disposition OF each case, and this ia :
bic Is followed by "A complete list OF
all persons convicted for violating the
prohibition law.
Another table shows that for the
year there were an aggregate number
OF aces defendants prosecuted. OF
whom 1853 were in cities and 746
in county jurisdictions.
AS To race there were SIS white
and 1.l21 co1ored defendants There
were $40 acQuittsi% 1s5 uolle pro-
sequies. 1870 convicted. there are
twenty FIVE fugitNes; in fourteen cases
there were hung turies. and there are
ninety -tive cases pending. There were
imposed 4 total Of 1879 months Of
JAIL terms and fines 20 the sum Of
SHIFTS we're imposed.
There IS a balance on hand for the
expenses 81 the department 10 March
I. 1918, of s17.267 IS, total having
been expended OF the appropriation
Va S@3-VE@ 20 Fe'r sue
Rcvenue Exceeds Expense.
III TO November ]. the five cent
revenue stamps which must Re at
tsched go Bquor shipments into Vir-
sinia have produced the sum Of .48-
2&s7o, or y surplus over the expense
of the department to that date Of
sic, 614.ob All of thi- in accordance
With law has been turned over TO the
state treasurer upon warrants from
th~ auditor Of public accounts
As 70 results Of prohibition the
Commissioner saws: Prohibition has
3 vital relationship to births. atil
births, deaths accidents and fires II
Is a distinct dies ppoin.ment to me
and will be to the public that COM
narrative statistics exhibiting the
beneficial effects OF prohibition there
n are not available. and II is i'm
possible 70 compile them In a rea-
sonable time Next years, REPORT
however. should include such COM
parsons
The criminal record OF the stnie
during the first prohibition year az
compared with the last wet year IN
set out in several tables including
returns in all o. the cities of the
state except Bristol and Radford
while several counties are not yet
available. These comparisons and
the general results of prohibition are
shown in the opening paragraphs of
this article
In discussing the results from tho
adoption or prohibition on the tax
income Of the state the commission
er SAYS:
Taxation Not Increased.
Much clatter was heard in 1914
about an inevitable Increase in taxes
20 overcome the revenue derived by
lac state from the license tax paid
ny sundry classes Of vendors Of IL
quor and OF the consequent bank
ruptcy Of city governments because
80 their loss of municipal tax on IL
quoY. In the revolution. of the sys-
1em of taxation in Virginia under
segregation com pariHon OF revenues
he uninformtng, but where Is the city
to be found which would exchange
the prohibition stimulation OF husi-
ness alone, not 20 speak OF the SO
briefly. peace order and happiness OF
It's citizens for the revenue previous
-ly from the saloons VIII Richmond
make this exchange VIII Norfolk?
Will Alexandra VIII any city re-
verse its present condition for its
previous condition for the vice? Let
terra from officials Of these cities in
dicate that no city in the common
wealth would make the exchange
whatever they may have thought be-
fore the effect or prohibition was de-
monstrated.T
Figures are quoted from the audi
for's report showing that the gross
collections covered into the state
treasury were sl262.925,s6 greater
the fret prohibition year than in the
last wet wear.
state Acquires q Surplus.
Continuing the commissioner sayE:
so far from ha wing an increase In
s&es the auditor of public accounts