Newspaper Page Text
County Committee Adopts Coercive Rule.
The Chatham County Executive Committee, or
a majority of that hotly, seems to have decided that
somebody on the primary ticket for dune 4 toward
whom the committee is especially friendly, needs
artificial bolstering up, lest he succumb to the ac
tivity of the voters' blue pencils.
This much has to he conceded in order to find any
reason whatsoever for the committee's action last
Monday in adopting a rule under the operation of
which a voter's ballot will he declared void in case
he fails to vote for at least three names for the
Legislature, five for County Commissioner and
twenty-five for membership on tlie Executive Com
mitee.
In other words, any citizen who may feel that
lie cannot conscientiously support the candidacy of
more than two persons offering for the Legislature,
must add a third whom he may perhaps deem unfit to
represent the county, or he disfranchised altogether
so far as that particular office is concerned.
There may he a distinction, hut there is no differ
ence between being arbitrarily compelled to vote for
a candidate who is distasteful, and being deprived
of voting' for a candidate of whom the voter ap
proves.
This action of the present Executive Committee
may embarrass the citizen who finds it undesirable
to “go the whole hog” on the Legislative and Coun
ty Commissionership sections of the ticket, but he
should clearly see his duty when he comes to operate
on that portion of the ballot containing- the names of
candidates for selection to the new Executive Com
mittee.
The following is the aye and nay vote upon she
adopt ion of the rule :
Ayes E. (A (Reason. A. S. (Juekonheimer, Martin
Coolev, .John Carr, dohn E. Schwarz. -I. K. Perritt,
T. X. West. William McCormick, R. (1. Richards and
Ceorge M. Petronoviteh.
Nays—R. d. Travis. Carl MendcL d. P. Wheless,
T. B. Cracen, Ceorge M. Williams. William Kehoe
and William Taylor.
Mr. 11. E. Wilson announces that if he had been
present he would have voted “no."
"Whether mistakenly or not. numbers of neople
believe that the rule was put forth in the interest of
two or more of tin* eanditdates for the Legislature,
and for the purpose of embarrassing voters having
strong prohibition proclivities. The present moment
is decidedly inopportune for any such conception
to get abroad and any abridgment of the rights of
voters is certain to have a reactionary effect upon
the very interest sought to be benefitted.
If the (leorgia prohibition law is to bo modified,
as a great majority of the people in this city hope it
will be. that end will be reached more expeditiously
through the effacement of haulers supposed to lx*
identified with the liquor interests than with their
active co-operation. It is human nature —strong,
healthy human nature —to want to be up and doing
when one's vital personal interests have been dam
aged. unreasonable and unreasoninglv damaged, but
THE REASON
proscription of long recognized rights ot citizenship
is not an effective weapon with which to meet in
tolerance.
At a time like this when the prohibition element
is on tin* alert to discover ulterior motives behind
every move of those opposed to strict prohibition, it
would certainly seem to be tin* wiser course for per
sons holding more liberal views to avoid all acts
capable of being manufactured into ammunition for
the use of the prohibitionists.
The farther a man travels in tin* I nited States
nowadays, the stronger grows his conviction that the
so-called prohibition wave is not a prohibition wave
at all. strictly speaking. That is. it is not the sud
den outcropping of a loathing for whisky and beer
n l wines when used as a beverage or for other
purposes. It is political, rather than moral. The
movement is an outburst of resentment, particularly
violent in the rural districts and small towns,
against what the manifestauts choose to call
“liquor rule in politics." Numbers id’ them
will tell you that had the whisky interests
kept to their distilleries, their warehouses and
their saloons, and left alone the council cham
bers, the mayoralties, tin* halls of the legislature,
the county, city and State offices and the registra
tion rolls, the drinking place would be no more
hated in America than it is in Cermany. They will
tell you that if tin* liquor interests had sought only
to influence legislation relating strictly to the liquor
question itself, no loud protest would have been reg
istered. But they are imbued with the belief that
tin* liquor interests have been controlling nearly all
legislation, affecting ('very other interest in addi
tion to their own. and it is against this supposed evil
that the greatest strength in tin* prohibition move
ment is directed.
What measure of justice or injustice is contained
in this view of the situation, is entirely beside the
question as it is now presented. The fact is. the
belief is very widely held, and nothing but sane
argument, and well authenticated proof of the non
existence of any such octopus-like political activity
on tin* part of the liquor men. will effectually com
bat it.
It is just as futile to try to rid a man's min 1 of
a false impression by the use of a club as it is for
our prohibition friends to try to reform bis morals
and strengthen his will power with that weapon.
('apt. Bobt d. Travis is widely commended for
his protest against the adoption of the objectionable
rule governing the primary. It was a courageous
act on the oart of the candidate for Solicitor-Cen
e’-al, and it is believed that others would strengthen
themselves by following his example, even at this
late day.
The endorsement given the new rule by State
Chairman Miller may bring comfort to its supporters
on the County Committee, but it will have no weight
for a modification of the general hostility toward
the measure prevalent in unofficial quarters.
5