The Ohio organ, of the temperance reform. (Cincinnati, [Ohio]) 1853-1854, 1853-02-18
OHIO Legislature.
CoLUalBUs, Feb. lO, ,63.

pI0NAOuo 4uSouVn' AOoJ-y yeas 0U, |
nays As.
Mr.. Withrow moved to amend SO
that liquor might be sold for camphor
and vinegar. Lost.
Mr.. Shellabarger moved to amend
SO as to forbid the seizure and de-
struction of Ohio wines and cider, un-
less offered at retail, or foreign liquors
in the hands Of an importer, while in
the casks or vessels in which they were
imported. Agreed to,
Mr.. Durand moved to commit the
bill to select committee of three,
with instructions to report it back
on Saturday. Lost-yeas 25, nays 56.
A call of the House washad, and 8
members found present.
The House refused to excuse Messrs
Gest and Beckel, and did excuse
Messrs. Hutchins and Rewburgh.
The other absentmembers being away
on leave. a7
Mr.. Hughes said that whatever his
private opinion mightbe in relation to
the bill under consideration, was not
called for at this time, inasmuch as he
considered himself instructed by the
delegates representing his county in
the State Temperance Convention.
These instructions were as follows
Vote against any bill that is not, in its
operations, as effectual as the Maine
Liquor Law. If this bill under con.
sideration would be as effectual as the
Maine Liquor Law, then (if | obeyed
instructions) / should vote for it; but,
Mr.. Speaker, such is not the bill be-
fore us. This bill allows the manu-
featuring Of ardent spirits, and only
seeks to prevent the drinking. Is this
the Maine Liquor Law? Certainly
not. Again, Mr.. Speaker, think the
proposition monstrous one--to allow
the manufacturing, and the privilege
Of shipping to other States fol sale,
what we prohibit in our own State.
My opinion, Mr.. Speaker, is, that
this bill, if it becomes a law, will not
be enforced and respected as it tshould
be, and will initiate against the cause
Of temperance. Such I understand to
the opinion Of majority of the tenn
perance advocates. | therefore feel
constrained to vote against this bill.
Mr.. Barnum said he was under the
same instructions, but as he construed
them, he felt constrained to vote for
the bill.
Mr.. Ward, ofWarren, gave his rea-
sons for supporting the bill.
The discussion was further contin-
ued by Messrs. Damon and Dawson
The vote was then taken, and re.
suited yeas AZ, nays 38, So the bill
was lost.
Those who voted in the affirmative
were
Messrs. Ackley, Barnum, Bartlett
Bell, Beswick, Bigelow, Boys, Casad
Cherington, Clark, Cole, Cornwell
Croxton, Damon, Fenner, Filler
Fisher, Foulke, George, Green, Ha
ley, Humphrey, James, Matthews
/ March, Mills, Morgan, Morrison, Nc
II Call, McClanahan, McMillen, Patter
son, Plumb, Ramage, Robertson, Rusl
Shnellabarger, Van Worries, Vermil
ion, Ward Of Warren, Yates anC
Speaker-42.
Those who voted in the negativ,
were
Messrs. Alexander, Allen, Baker
Bishop, BRAKEMAN, Brown, Bushnell
Cockerill, Courtright, Dale, Dawson
Deming, Dickey, Durand, Hollings
head, HOuk, Hughes, Knapp, Krider
Larabee, Lathrop, LeBlond, Lytle
Means, Montgomery, Mckee, New
burg, Okey, O'Neil, Poland, Renick
Rickley, Smith of Holmes, Smith Q
Stark, Snodgrass, Stanley, Steblel
III CLz-A CG-.- MA r O-c..I -,