Year: 1875

county In tie United States. we nave
this singular pre-eminence, there never
has been conviction for their violation
within the county (uuless we have been
misinformed) and this for no want OF
cases or facts to establish them.


Things got to such pass that year
ago a petition signed by a majority OF
the legal voters of this town was pre-
sented TO the Council asking them net
to recommend any one for license.
One well acquainted with Charles
town expresses the opinion that such
petition could have been gotten for that
town and could be now; and the liquor
interest is always much stronger in the
towns than in the country. A sufficient
canvass of the county was had TO show
that majority, (there was reason to
believe very large majority OF tax
payers aud voters were utterly opposed
to the licencing of these tippling houses
and petition signed by near two thoG-
sand persons men and women was pre-
sented to the County Court against
them, when the Court by vote Of
twelve Counting the presiding justice
known 10 be with the majority though
not voting) to three granted the peti-
ton. One of the magistrates on his re-
turn from Court was hailed by one of
the biggest drunkalds in the county
"What did you do about license?
"We voted them down You did
right" was the drunkards emphatic re-
ply unfortunately with All oath.) They
aught to be voted down for when so
where they are | cannot help getting
drunk" A similar decision had been
reached by majority Of the counties
of the State-in some of them fifteen
years ago, and them some twenty or
thirty counties in Old Virginia. find
no,o for The results. At first there was
a great change, observed of all obsery-
ers. The squads of loaters and tipplers
hanging about the saloons disappeared
and went to their several occupations.
The wives of drunkards took heart IN
hope that happier days would revisit
them again. Green young fellows com
ing into town from the country and
thinking they must signalize their COM
ing by getting something TO drink
found the bad practice for the time gone
out of fashion and then went home in
their senses.


Soon after an old offender in this
line who had been fined and deprived
of license in Maryland began the sale
in violation of law upon the river.
Upon which the Governors of the two
States interfered, and the court of
Washington County, and the citizens
generally, indignant at the outrage had
the nuisance removed at the earliest day
which it could be done by law.


A number of instances of supposed
violation Of the law were reported to
the Commonwealth Attorney, who as
in duty bound brought them before the
Grand Jury, who were sworn by solemn
oath to find according to the law and
evidence.


There was no doubt about the law and
report says, the evidence put the guilt
Of the parties charged beyond doubt,
Notwithstanding unfavorable reports
touching some of the witnesses. But
no presentment was made. This OF
course emboldened those who lad been
selling contrary to law and drunkenness
begun visibly to increase. Application
was made TO the court in October for
license to sell beer. Unfortunately this
application was granted. We have
been informed, and as we suppose cor
rectly that some of the magistrates were
under the impression that there was no
drunkenness upon beer. But the truth
is quite the reverse. In England drunk
enness is chiefly upon beer, and so in
furious to health that Sir Henry Tbomp-
son the most eminent Surgeon in Eng
land land not religious man) pro
nounccs the national beverage the ma
tional curse and imrlores the Church
of England for humanitys sake to exert
its influence for its suppression.


But this is not the worst OF It, This
license has opened the way for the sale
of whisky, 4 man coming from Charles
town drunk was asked how he got into
that condition. His answer was 81
asked for beer but don't know what
they gave me- But the violation Of
the law is too notorious to need proof
Large quantities Of whisky are seen on
their way consigned to druggists and
others and witnesses are proiFered to
swear that it is sold for tipping and
to parties TO whom all the liquor laws
prohibit its being sold, while those
whose duty it is to prosecute say il is
useless to bring suits, and past expert
ence seems TO prove this.


Now the next question is mho il
guihy1 On whom does the responsi-
bility rest' This question will be at
tended to next week.


We add the usual items Of intelli-
genee.


aIssIssTPPr.


The law here obliges the applicant
for license TO procure the consent of =
majority Of the women of the district
over Is years OF age.


This is putting the shoe on the right
foot. The burden of getting petitions
fall on those who profit by this traffic,
not on those who suffer by it. Missis-
sippi is a gallant State.


GEORGIA.


The wisdom Of its Legislature in this
as in so many other respects is telling
upon the prosperity OF the people.