The times-news. [volume] (Hendersonville, N.C.) 1927-current, 1933-10-21
LETTERS TO
THE EDITOR
Editor Times-News,
Hendersonville, n. c.

HenderSonVllle, y. O'
Dear Sir: ~,
It has been suggested that no
one has offered program de-
signed to control the abuse OF
LIQUOR in North Carolina, when
and if the burlington act Is
abolished and ntaional prohlDi-
ton ceases to exist. If it is true
that no program has been offer
ed then | shall claim to be the
first one to offer one. Here II
is:
There shall be no liquor manu-
featured in North Carolina eX-
cept in regional districts (say a
DOZEN laid off by the state. IN
each district there shall be but
one plant, operated for the manu-
facture of whiskey only, under
state charter. Ownership to be
controlled to the extent that no
one !party shall own more than
10 per cent Of the stock, and no
one who is an officer shall be al
lowed to own more stock than
the difference between what
members of his immediate family
own and Is per cent of the stock
in said company. Salaries to be
fixed by the state. No alcohol to
be manufactured. No state tax
to be imposed on whisky. Any
person, firm or corporation to be
allowed to manufacture and sell
wines and beer, but tax to be
imposed upon its sale. Any per-
son to be allowed to make wine
or beer or both for home con-
sumption but imprisonment (no
fines imposed) for engaging in
the sale of it. without first OBJ
tanning a license to manufacture
and paying the sale tax imposed.
Imprisonment for a manufacture
er to purposely evade the tax no
fines imposed).
By imposing no state tax on
whisky the price will be kept low
so as to discourage bootlegglng.
BY not allowing sole ownership
bv one or a few, great profits to
individuals and consequent power
of few being in control, the
danger and past experience OF
the "1iquor power" would be
greatly lessened. Take the profit
out of the business and there Will
be none. BY allowing any one to
make beer or wine for home con-
sumption and by placing a high
tax on manufacture and sale you
have taken the big money out OF
the business and still not denleh
any one the right to have the
beverage if he wants to have 1t:
You have here both encouraged
the consumption of wines and
beer as against whisky and the
more the home manufacture or
the commercial manufacture OF
wines and beer the lesss that of
whisky. l am not going into
argument at length.
The next step is TO change our
penal laws and certain rules of
evidence. For the first offense
person driving a car while
drunk is to receive a three
months term on. the roads Ono
fines imposed, for the second
offensc he is to receive from SIX
months to two years in the dis
cretion Of the court, no fines inn
posed). In case Of first offense
he is to have his license taken
away for one year, in the second
offense for five years. and upon
being convicted Of driving a car
during the time his license is
held up he will serve on the
roads for six months (no fines
imposcdD. If he goes home while
drunk and abuses his wife; or
children he is to receive forl the
first offense four months on the
roads mo fines imposed, second
offense, one to two years (no
fines imposed). In each case
wife or children may etstify
against him, and upon second Of
Tense wife may get a divorce and
have custody Of children.
| might polish this up bit,
but the above is sufficient to
convey my program in general
except that l failed to state that
there would be no whisky edver-
tisements. either on bill boards
or in newspapers.
When the legislature has the
nerve to enact the right kind Of
laws the liquor proposition can
be handled, but in farming the