Nashville daily patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1855-1857, 1856-02-07

years experience shows the principle of the law
we adopt to be beneficial in its effect, then the
next Legislature can extend the principle Al
though | am myself in favor of prohibition, as I
know that a large number of the members on this
1 floor differ from me upon this subject and are
unwilling TO vote for prohibition In any shane.
and although it is well known here that have
introduced to this House Memorial for District
BILL still, in order that we make move to-
wards reformation, am willing 10 compromise
upon the Bills now before us, (and that too when
they are not favorites with me, 1.-THE one allow
ing no liquor to be drank on the premises where
sold, and prohibiting it from all public assem-
blies of the people--and the other providing for
the prevention ofthe sale Of Adulterated Liquors,
&c. These seem TO me to be moves towards re-
Upon whom the legal responsibility is thrown we
have shown; We come now to inquire upon
! whom is the moral responsibility thrown! Upon
the Legislature rest the moral as well as the le-
gal responsibility of ali the evil that arises from
Legislation upon this subject. In Exodus it is
said: "lf an OK gore man a woman that they
die. then the OK shall be surely stoned and his
flesh shall not be eaten-but the owner of the OK
shall be quiet, but if the OK were wont to push
with his horn in time past, and hath been testi-
! fed to bis owner and he hath not kept him in but
that he hath killed man or woman, the OK shall
be stoned and bis owner shall be put to death -
Here the owner is punished because he has knowl-
4 IT,.
being in his power Herein exists a common
Law principle. and one in full force to-day lin
| princlple) in Tennessee. If man upon the pub
lie square in Nashville, when a crowd of people
| are collected together fire pistol and any per-
son is brought to his death, the person firing the
pistol is guilty of manslaughter This is a COM
mon law principle laid down in the Bible. The
/ person firing is punished because he has knowl-
edge of the evil. The Bible is part of the COM
mon law of the land in full force to-day,-we are
sworn into this House upon the Bible-every
oath in the land is taken upon The Bible, because
we acknowledge it TO be the basis and foundation
| OF all legal and moral principle. Common Law
Is principle, or rule established by the common
! consent OF socety-and we to-day acknowledge
the Bible the foundation of all law for the legal
/ or moral government Of man, and that law is in
! full force.
| And five know the traffic in ardent spirits as
a beverage is working or will work an evil to
society, the moral responsibility is upon us to
move it. This is great responsibility, and for
one am willing TO lend my assistance to remove
it.
We, by licensing tippling houses, are two hun
dred years behind the times. If am not mista-
| ken more than 200 years ago in London, he who
pkept an aie-house to draw Off men from their
! daily employment--to entice the young into the
/ practice OF drinking strong drinks, and thereby
encourage vice and dleness- make paupers and
/ piOuuCe CIllHe-NdS Dy Ine common law l0en III
force indiCtable. | think can show the author
tiles for this position-then all authority for
trafficng in Spirtu0us Liquors as beverage
arises solely from legislative enactment-and all
the responsibility of the same both in legal and
moral view is upon us.
Mr.. Nixon said the bill before the House re-
ceived his appreciation in some respects. He
was opposed to the fourth section of that BILL
because every man had the right to take liquor
to public gatherings, and to drink it at such
places, provided he did not interfere with the
rights of others. He defied any man to show
that the Legislature had the authority to pass
law abridging this right. Men were possessed of
| inalenable rights, and one of these waste do as
they pleased, so that they did not infringe upon
the rights of others. He would ask if it is right
that man should be indicted for taking a single
dram at public gathering, as he unquestiona-
bly, could be under this bill? If a man hap
peEed to have little of liquor in his pocket at
| court. muster, election, public speaking, or
public gathering of any kind, he dare not take
social dram with his friend, because he would
be indicted for this very act. He regarded this
feature of the bill as entirely too stringent, and
could not vote for it.
He contended that he was better reform man
than any one who advocated the enactment of a
a prohbtory law. The best little speech he had
ever made was in the Senate two years ago in
opposition to prohibitory law and in favor of
tae repeal OF the license law He regarded the
fourth section of Mr.. Brien's bill as prohibition
Of the deepest dye, and he considered the senti-
ment Of the people of Tennessee as decidedly
opposed TO that feature in the temperance reform,
as had been evidenced since the adjournment of
the Legislature two years ago.
He had advocated the repeal of the tippling
law two years ago, and was willing to fall back
upon the quart law which, with certain restrc-
tons, he regarded as the best law we have yet
had regulating the sale of spirituous liquors, and
he occupied the same position to-day. He would
favor the adoption of bill which would protect
the rights Of all classes.
On motion of Mr. TEMPLE, the House resolved
itself into committee of the whole, to consider
the various bills to regulate the sale of spiritu
Gus liquors.
Mr.. BRrEN, in reply to Mr.. Nixon, said there
was no prohibition in his bill. The fourth sec
tiou did not provide that man should not take
a dram himself or give one to his friend, il he
had bottle in his pocket at public gathering.
This section of the bill did provide, however,
against the taking of bald face TO public
gatherings and selling or giving it indscrimi-
nately to every one who would drink it, He re-
garded this as a most wholesome provision in
the bill.
He conceded that a man had a right to manu-
facture and sell liquor-the constitution of the
State secured to every man that right-but when
4
the Legislature had right to enact laws re-
straining and regulating its sale. He contended
that the Legislature had no right to prescribe
the quantity in which liquor should be sold, but
II had right TO prohibit its being drank at such
places as will render II nuisance To illus
trate this point: If man takes quantity OF
liquor TO q camp-meeting or q religious meeting
OF any other description, and sells il TO men who
get drunk and disturb the congregation in their
Worship he ought not only to be indicted but
severely punished. Public assemblages of the
people of any description ought to be protected
against the evils growing out of the Internal
l. affc.
Although he did NOS drink drop himself, be
was not an advocate Of prohibition, because he
thought it clear that the people Of Tennessee
did not want such law.
He considered the fourth section the great
feature OF his bill One of It's good effects would
be 10 put a stop 10 treating at elections All
were familiar with the evils growing ont of this
feature in our contests for office. This section
would put all men upon an equality, for great
many high-m nded, honorable men would resort
TO the expedient of treating at any time TO IN
crease their popularity.
He thought the nquisitoriai power contained
I In the sixth section of the bill a good feature.
aud hoped Il would not be stricken ont. There
I were palpable reasons Why men would rot be-
come prOsec ators in a large number OF instances.
1 Men who usually violate the laws regulating the
sale Of spirituous liquors generally Of a very
( vicious eharacter, and would stop at scarcely
I any thing 10 be revenged upon those who would
/ make them respeeters Of the laws. Every man
desired 10 have as little as possible 70 DO with
\ this class.
He was opposed TO the district system because
he regarded il as unconstitutional. The consti-
tuition provided that all laws shall be equal and
j uniform in their operations and this law would
/ not emma within that nrorieion lie suDn0zsd a
case 10 illustrate It's operation. The people re-
siding in district No would 20 against grant
ing license, and ''doggery' would be set up
] - tha lino aud cil.zena in No Mnnll gei