Liquor and Prohibition
Tempera nee workers were active in tlie
state before the Civil War. and since then,
the issue of Liquor and Prohibition has been
popping up at frequent intervals.
PARADOXICAL a» it may seem,
tlw mountuineou- section "f West¬
ern Xorth Carolina is further re¬
moved from legalize'! liquors than at
anv time since Xorth Carolina adopted
Predictions that Buncombe and
other counties west of the Blue Ridge¬
catering to tourist trade, would find
it expedient to accept
ЛВС
stores have
not •materialized, and Chamber of
Commerce and tourist club officials
agree that the section is not handi¬
capped by the absence of them. True,
much legal liquor flow, across the
nearby South Carolina border and
illegal concoctions trickle from the
isolated mountain
со-
sentiment against li¬
ma in» steadfast and h
lized i
Not
.„M
s, but public
.r stores re¬
even crystal-
ifA fli'flVA /vnfwviitinti
mg and dry Re-
er-present threat
or party that might
lean p
to any group oi
*ponsor an ABC store election in the
mountain country, but an overwhelm¬
ing sentiment against legalized liquor
has been honestly inherited.
Banner Dry Counties
Yancey County, tucked away in the
folds of the Southern Appalachians,
was awarded the Women's Temper¬
ance Union banner for returning the
highest percentage of dry votes when
the state voted in its fir?t prohibition
law in 190$. Of the 1,211 votes east
in that county, only 10 were in oppo¬
sition.
At the same time. Buncombe County
won the banner offered for the largest
majority of dry votes, a margin of
3.040 votes.
In the early years, before 1SS1,
those opposed to strong drink con¬
cerned themselves only with temper¬
ance reform, and prohibition of
liquors did nor enter into considera¬
tion. “The Friends of Temperance,"
a dry organization, appeared early in
the IsOO’s in Petersburg, Ya., and the
movement spread to Xorth and South
Carolinu. In 1877, Xorth Carolina
hud 290 chapters, and a society organ,
“The Spirit of the Age," was being
published by the Rev. R. H. Whitaker
at Raleigh.
tty J. B. IIKKLI.X
The dry issue was first thrust upon
the General Assembly in 1 SSI bv such
ardent leaders as Reverend Whitaker.
Rev. Jesse H. Page, Prof. J. T. Aber¬
nathy (then president of Rutherford
College) and the Rev. George B.
Whitmire of Salisbury. The Legis¬
lature granted permission for an elec¬
tion on the issue of restricting the
manufacture and sale of liquors. So
overwhelming was the dry defeat that
the liquor question lay dormant for
20 years.
Anti-Saloon Leaguo
In 1902 the Anti-Saloon League
was organized in Xorth Carolina and
succeeded in electing a majority in the
General Assembly in favor of restrict¬
ing liquor consumption. In 1903 the
Watts law was passed, which forbade
the operation o: saloon- and distill¬
eries outside of incorporated towns
und cities, so that some measure of
regulation might be thrown about
them. Ex-Senator F. M. Simmons
was then a member of the state senate
and chairman of the Democratic state
executive committee, and was a power¬
ful factor in adoption of the law.
While the statute had the effect of
destroying the evil in some of tho
worst unincorporated communities, it
was evaded by others through in¬
corporation.
But the more important features of
the Watts law were not immediately
apparent. Under its provisions,
municipalities were given the right
to call referendums, upon petition of
one-third of the registered voters, to
decide whether or not saloons and
distilleries were to be licensed within
their corporate limits. Town after
town outlawed the saloon and dis-
pensary under this local option plan
until, within four and one-half '’cars,
saloons and dispensaries were driven
from 6S of the then 9S countie.» in the
State. Thirty-one towns continued to
operate dispensaries and 19 granted
licenses to saloons. But the only
municipalities of size among these
were Wilmington, Salisbury and
Winston-Salem.
With 85 per cent of the state tucked
under the dry wing, the Anti-Saloon
Leaguo, led by John A. Oates, chair¬
man of the state executive committee,
and R. L. Davis, organizer, in 190S
memorialized Gov. Robert B. Glenn
and the General Assembly for a law
extending the provisions of the Watts
law to forbid the manufacture and
sale of intoxicating liquors over the
entire state. -Viter considerable
maneuvering, the legislature, however,
gave the dri-s the Long-Davis law
authorizing a state-wide referendum
on the issue.
Some Outstanding Leaders
In anticipation of the referendum,
the dries mustered under their banner
such potent leaders as Senator Sim¬
mons, Judge Jeter C. Pritchard, Ex-
Gov. Charles B. Aycock, Gov. Robert
B. Glenn. Josephus Daniel». Hugh
G. Chatham, S. McIntyre, J. A.
Hartness, Henry A. London, G. W.
W aits, T. 11 . V anderford, J. J. Rogers,
Henry A. Page, Frank R. McNinch,
W. C. Xcwland, A. D. Watts, 11. G.
Fennell, J. H. Tucker, J. D. McCall,
Settle Dockery, A. D. Ward, J. H.
Pou, W. X. Jones, L. L. Smith, X. B.
Broughton, W. H. Sprunt, E. T.
Cansler, James I. Johnson, Clarence
H.
Рос,
George P. Pell, R. B. White,
W. J. Everett, Cameron Morrison,
F. S. Blair, Thomas J. Shaw, Q. K.
Ximocks, W. S. O'B. Robin-on. E. F.
Aydlett, A. M. Scales, R. Lee Wright,
J. W. Bailey. W. F. Snider, R. L.
Malison, W. T. Shaw. J. L. Cheat,
W. B. Cooper, Virgil S. Lusk, W. B.
Smoot and a host of others.
With much flare and noise, the
electorate of the state on May 26,
190S, returned a total of 113,612 votes
tor outlawing John Barleycorn com-
Kred with 69.416 votes against. The
v went into effect on January 1 of
the following year. Since there was
no law forbid ding the purchase of in¬
toxicating leverage? outside of the
state, large quantities were imported,
presumably for personal u-e. Beer
was still manufactured and sold within
the state.
In 1911 the General Assembly, in
to
