The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1922-06-19
FIGURES DO NOT LIE.

OF the fallure Oh pTOnlplIloH' apouI
the only time we have heard of JUS
tice Clark, of the United States Su-
rreme Court since his appointment,
was when he denounced prohibition.
A week or two ago former Judge
Powell, at a meeting of the Georgia
Bar Association in Savannah, spoke
along the same lines as did Justice
Clark in New York. Perhaps it was
because the one was in Savannah and
the other in New York that these two
disciples of the law had so little res
pect for prohibition. Maybe they
were violating the law at the time
they spoke. That makes a man have
little respect for the law.
Judge Powell in the course of his
remarks said that he had been one
of the Georgia legislators response
BILE for the enactment of the prohibi-
ton law in that state. But that does
not count for anything. The judge
was in politics then. He was still rum
ming. The question is, was and is he
a real prohibitionist in practice as
well as in politics? If he was, and is,
what was he doing in Savannah, may
we ask?
There is a widespread and consist
ent movement just now to 6scredit
the prohibition amendment to the
constitution and prohibition legisla-
ton generally. The attack, they say,
is because there are so many VIOLA
tions of the law, and the people do
not have respect for the law, and
therefore the law cannot be enforced.
But we have violations of the law
against larceny, against murder,
against speeding, and violations of
many other laws. Nobody has sug-
gested that we license thievery be-
cause a good many people steal; no
body has advocated immunity from
punishment for murder because mur-
ders are still committed, and that af-
ter hundreds of years of attempted
enforcement of the laws against that
crime; nobody desires to make "the
sky the limit" in the matter of speed
ing just because aptomobilists every
day are violating the law against
speeding, in Abbeville, in Abbeville
County, and everywhere else.
But they say that the condition of
the country grows worse under pro-
hibition than under the legalized sale
of liquor. We deny it. If there is a
place which the thirsty crowd might
be willing to select for a test it is
New York. In New York prohibition
has had such a good effect that we
read the following facts stated in the
New York Herald of last Friday:
"Since prohibition went into
effect the decline in the alcoholic
death rate for New York city has
assumed extraordinary proper
tions, according to the report
submitted to Commissioner Hay
mes today by Director Day of
New York.
"The total number of deaths for
the year 1921 caused by drinking
was 141, compared with 900 for
1916, Mr.. Day said. In the seven
years of license 1910 to 1916 in
elusive, he declared that 4,437
deaths resulted from alcoholism,
wood alcohol and alcohol poison
ing, averaging 634 per year. In
1920 and 1921 there were 268
deaths, or an average of 1874. Mr.
Day calculated this to be de-
crease of 500 per annum.
"In 1919 there were 80 deaths
from wood alcohol, 29 in 1920,
and in 1921 there were but ID,
Mr.. Day estimated. This was only
eight more than in 1910.
"Life insurance figures also
show that in 1917 the death rate
due to alcoholism was 4.9 per
100000 policy holders" Mr.. Day
reported, "while in 1921 the ra-
ito was 0.9, or only one-ifth of
the figure for 1917"
That is not such a bad record, we
think, in a city where they say the
laws are violated more consistently