The times-news. [volume] (Hendersonville, N.C.) 1927-current, 1935-02-20
yIRGINIA's LIQUOR BUSINESS A
WARNING TO NORTH CAROLINA


The Rock Hill, S. c., Herald voices d's-
enlargement over the outlook for con-
troll of the liquor business throughout the
country. The Herald says This nation is
due for a season of utter disregard for 50
briefly. The next ten years will witness
more intemperance, drunkenness and
greater number of drunken drivers than
has ever been known in the nations his
tory"
The South Carolina. papers prediction
may or may not come true. 1t is rapidly
coming true, in comparison with conditions
existing under national prohibition, as bad
as those conditions were after the liquor
crowd got its systematized campaign un-
der.w to break down that law; but it
must be remembered that events move
much more rapidly now than in the past.
A period of time 50 long as ten years will
probably not be necessary to arouse ma
jority of the people of the country against
the so-called controlled" liquor business.
For example, in Virginia, which has, We
are told, the almost perfect system Of State
operation of the liquor business, the city Of
Bristol rebelled against the system in four
or five months after it was established and
voted it out. 1t is said that a number Of
Virginia cities and counties will take that
course as soon as they get the privilege Of
voting on the issue.
BriStol's experience with the State
owned liquor traffic was highly illuminat-
ing The business flourished, and, so did
lawleSSnesS and all the evils that are part
Of the liquor business, and which cannot
be eliminated from the business by State
control or operation. In addition to the
multiplying of the evils of drunkenness
and lawlessness in Bristol, the business
men of the city found that the liquor bust
ness was. in direct competition with all
other lines of business. They discovered
that money spent for liquor in State
owned store was as certainly lost to the
channels of legitimate trade as it would
have been if spent in saloon or paid over
to the bootleggers. The liquor business
flourished in Bristol for few months, but
long enough for the people of the city to
discover that other lines of business were
decreasing as the liquor trade increased.
The business angle of the problem was
probably one of the strongest factors lead
ing Bristol to vote out the State-owned
liquor business.
Robert H. Cooke of Shelby gives The
Charlotte Observer some information about
Virginia brief experience in the liquor
business. Mr.. Cooke. says of Senator John
Sprunt Hills proposal to adopt the Vir
ginia plan in North Carolina:
GAS this proposed bin is modelled after the Vir
ginia state store liquor law let's see how it hi.
worked in Virginia. During four months, from
June l to October l, 1884, there has been an in
crease in arrests for public drunkenness all owe
the state and give the official figures for twelv
cities to illustrate this. Arrests for public drunk
enness during these four months, as compared I
a similar period in 1888 under prohibition, in
creased $40 per cent in Bristol, AGA per cent i
Charlottesville, TOO per cent in Clifton. Forg,
1897 per cent in Danville, 1902 per cent in Hal
risonburg 90 per cent in Lynehburg, 1917 pc
cent in Newport News, 66.6 per cent in Norfol
46.7 per cent IN Petersburg SO per cent in Port
mouth, 1913 per cent in Richmond, and l2o.Z pr
cent in Staunton. And might add that during tn
same period drivers of automobiles while drunk IL
cresaed 1913 per cent ! am reliably Informed TN
two out of every three gallons of liquor bong