The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1918-01-08

been taught the truth. and who hav-
| ing been taught the truth, and who
/ having appeared TO accept II, sud
denly forsake the right way and re-
turn to their evil courses. II com
/ pares such persons to the SOW which
! having been washed, at the sight OF
mud-hoie returns to her wallowing
In the mire. This Is what has befaIIen
| the Times Dispatch
+ The AntiSaioon League OF Virginia,
as the organized agency OF the prohi-
oition forces of Virginia. has never
received from the Times Dispatch
tbs slightest assistance In the passage
J or any prohibition legislation. Not
only SO, but the Times Dispatch has
/ criticized, opposed and denounced the
league and it's leaders in nearly every
effort that has been made to abolish
tho partnership OF the state of Nir-
gnia with the saloon. For whatever
good has come to Virginia from the
Mann law. the Byrd law. or the Mapp
/ law, the Tim Dispatch, the News
Leader and ths Evening Journal can
/ be given no credit or praise. They
! fought all of these laws. and but for
The Richmond FirEinian and the won~
dertui record of the past year. as set
forth in the report of Prohibition
Commissioner Peters. would not have
been made. and Virginia in the past
year OF extraordinary conditions
would have been cursed by the saloon.
Since the law went into effect.
November i, 1915, the Times Dispatch
has said little on the prohibition ques-
ton. but 1t did say about three months
ago that the prohibition question had
been settled in Virginia. indeed, that
1t was dead issue, and 1t appeared
TO agree that the prohibition law is
a good law.
Now, however. when prohibition
has become a clearly recognized ma
tionai question, and the great ma
jority OF the men and women of the
nation have determined that the traf-
fic in intoxicants ahall be prohibited
in every part OF the country, of which
they are citizens. the Times Dispatch
shows that while It might have been
outwardly washed and therefore had
the appearance OF It convert, yet there
had been no real change in the ma
ture of the beast, for at the very
first opportunity 1t returns TO Its
wa flowing In the mire
Neither the Times~D Dispatch nor the
venomous News Leader can fly In the
face of the splendid results of the
Mapp law and ask for its repeal by
the general assembly. but the Times
Dispatch cannot agree that prohiot-
ton is a governmental policy OF sucn
Importance to the people that IT
should be settled finally for the whole
nation bv the adoption OF national
prohibition constitutional amend
ment IT has not yet learned the
true nature Of the traffic and ifs re-
lation to the economic and moral wei
fare OF the people. Slavery, the In
ID ~ nJa
United States senators-~these are al
matters Of such nation wide import
| ance that they should be determined
by a constitutional amendment, but
the LIQUOR trnfflcI ''thnt In simply
| local question: il concerns the per
| sonaI habits Of the people OF a com
munity; It In not right for the peo~
pIe Of virginia TO decide whether the
people OF New York shall he allow
ed 70 sell Intoxicating liquor; II is
violation Of the principle of sell gov
! eminent: a denial Of the doctrine Oh
states rights; an outrageous suoVer-
s,on Of our right 10 life. liberty ana
| the pursuit OF happin ess. for which
our fathers sacrificed, bied and died
These and familiar statements are
yuade nv the Times Dispatch and by
t4he founders of Anti Ratification ctuo
| in Norfolk, as II they were belhs Ut
tered for the first time
But they are the same old suoter~
fuCea which have done service IN one
form or another In every prohibition
Tcht In town, county. state or nation
Personal liberty, local self-govern~
nent states rights-what famii'aF
sound these phrases have! mere
would not be any 'sumptuary legisia-
ltton." not a prohibition law or any
44pfa hooks of anE
state, II such objections had been
needed
| The sufficient answer to all such
statements Ia that the liquor traffic is
not a local question II Ia a public
nuisance 1t Ia a menace to the prop
erty, happiness, safety and life OF the
IncopIe of the town, state and nation
As a public nuisance 1t ought to- he
nhnted by law. 1t can be partially
nbated by county law but not effec'
lively 1t can be further abated ny
statewide law, but not entirely, 1t can
he further abated by national legisla-
H ton like the Webb Kenyon law and
Il tho Reed nti-shipment law, but ex-
perience has fully demonstrated that
the lionor traffic IL "a travelling public
nuisance, and that II Is impossible to
conffne the damage 1t inficts within
the boundary of any state where the
nuisance is tolerated and licensed The
lllceEse to sell intoxicants, TO make
men drunk. In Baltimore, in Phtladel-
phta, in Cincinnati, in New York, ope-
rates far beyond the bounds of the
city or state where its license is grant
ed These licensed cities become the
iaraanals from which the pliers of the
traffic. the bootlesgers and the blind
tigers draw their supplies. More
over. they poliute and destroy our
Mons. who go to them from dry states
THE misery pauperism, insanity and
crime which the traffic engenders
the wet" cities and states cannot be
held within the boundary of the wet
sections. 1t sends Its vile product out
TO other states. and like smallpox and
cholera 1t calls for national quaran
tine, which viii act to destroy tn
traffic in every part of the nation
| The people OF this country have
made up their minds concerning the
liquor traffic. They have decided that
n traffic which Is an economic and
moral evil In one state cannot be an
economic and moral good In nnother
state. They have decided that this
nation cannot exist part drunk and
part sober. They have decided that
as citizens OF the United States. as
well as citizens of the state of Vlr-
GINA or of any other state. that they
a xxyti19 foV =