The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1920-09-03

ectable, that he was useful and
ttcntive legislator and that the hon.
~ Ct !li3 motives and conduct was
ever impeached. Discussion at this
ate day, far removed from the set
ing and circumstances of the time,
r. his position on this or that bill is
not enlightening.
S. the contest for United States
enator narrowed to these two ques-
ions:
Has Senator Smith faithfully rep
scented the public opinion of South
Carolina and the aspirations of its
people and docs he, therefore, de
'clve vote of Endorsement?
Do the people of South Carolina
wish to indicate reversal of opinion
in respect of prohibition and pro-
claim it to the republic by sending
TO Washington a - senator favorable
to the modification of the Volstead
law and broader Interpretation of
the Eighteenth, or prohibition,
amendment?
The State has never believed in
prohibition by constitutional amend
ment and repeatedly has said So
but the minority in agreement with
it has not been considerable in South
Carolina. The whole delegation in
congress, one member excepted, vot-
ed for the submission of the amend
nlc:..t, South Carolina already had
voted for statewide prohibition in
1915, practically no strong voice was
raised against ratification and the
legislative vote in it's favor was, to
all intents and purposes, unanimous.
Forty-four of At other states ratified
it.
Have the majority of people of
South Carolina changed their minds?
There is no evidence of it. If they
have, they have swiftly veered to the
opinion held by The State more than
90 years. The nomination of Mr. War
ren would have been hailed, undou bt-
cdiy, as an event Of national /, signifi-
canoe and would have heartened op-
ponents of bone-dry prohibition
throughout the country. Not that Mr..
Warren is "liquor man" or that the
majority of his supporters are dis
posed to return to saloons or dispen-
saries. There is minority of excel
lent citizens, many of them living in
cities, as the voting in Columbia and
Charleston last Tuesday has shown,
who are convinced that the nations
prohibition policy is too harsh and Sc
we're and that it is dangerous men,
ace to individual liberty.
But what of the majority? We are
able to read in the returns of the bal
loting only that people of South Car
olina are resolved that prohibition, as
written in the constitution and the
Volstead act, must not be weakened,
must not be diluted with mild wines
and beer, that there shall be no back
ward step or sign of recession. Mr..
Warren made a daring adventure in
politics, his courage was admirable
and he was indorsed by handsome
minority cf the voters, but it can not
by any stretch of imagination be re-
garded as forecast of the swinging
of the state of South Carolina from
prohibition to thin
ner and more elastic form thereof.
We await the second primary.
Why turn eyes from facts? The
women will in future vote in South
Carolina and everywhere. They are
prohibitionists. Most of them, we ap-
prehend, are unreasoning and unrea-
sonable prohibitionists and will con-
tinue to be for time, at any rate.
We look forward to a change in the
United States in respect to the "li-
quor question"-but. the look is far
forward. At this moment, prohibition
sentiment is stronger in South Caro-
lima and throughout the country than
it has ever been and the ratification
of the Nineteenth amendment nearly
doubles the number of its voting de-
Tenders.