The Indianapolis daily herald. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1865-1868, 1865-11-30

sellers 4 Ale. Bear, Wine, a.: and the sellers
Of whisky. Brandy. Rum, a.
q IL amsnd- scrtion 4 u the act of 1859 30
that applicants petitions shall be signed bv
twenty five residents Of the ward. or by forty
I've residents q the township. setting forth
character. &c. and the applicant shall prove
bis petition; whereupOn the license shall ISSUE
upon his giving bond--the first class i'm the
sum Of 500. and the second class in Sl.ooO-
conditioned that he shall Keep an orderly house
3. IL amends the 9Th section Of the act Of
lsia. a. % tax so year for license 81 the
trst class. and S2j1 for the second.
4. IL amends section II 80 a. 10 hX the pen
atty for aduiterating liquors at from so 10
500. % which NAV be added imprisonment
not exceeding three mouths.
>. Penalty for misrepresentation a. 70 age by
the buyer and drinkers 10 S35.
9. Re-enacts the penalties Of section 10.
:. Peaalty for second conviction: II shall
b. part Of the judgment ofthe Court that the
license shall be revoked. and that no license
shah issue % such offender for one year amer
the date of his conviction.
Mr.. NENCOMB urged his motion because
he thought the bill had not been long enough
printed 10 have received adequate attention.
The original bill was i'm effect prohibitory
law-so declared by it, friends on the floor.
He had given thought % this subject. He had
voted for the prohibatory law ten years Ego.
He had been lately in the state Of Maine
the state Of the original Maine LIQUOR Law
where that statute i still in force: but he saw
these bars in the hotels and drinking shops i'm
the cities a. abundant and unrestricted a. here
in Indianapolis. This bill might have good
effect in the rural districts. He did not think
this OF any legislation would suppress drink
ing in the cities: but he thought his substitute
would 10 better. We had not in our legisls-
ton distinguished between fermented and dis
titled liquors. lie believed i'm the Henry Ward
Beecher doctrine, that we had better encourage
breweries and discourage distilleries. He then
recited the provisions Of his substitute. lie
would reduce the number Of drinking shops
by the large amount Of license which he pre-
scribed for retailers Of the second class. The
license and the fee would amount to about 500
year. He admitted that the passage Of the
original bill would do good I'M the country:
but II wonld array every saloon man against
the law. Ii we permit the sale of these lighter
drinks, we do something TO wean people from
stronger drinks. His substitute amended
some four or five sections Of the existing law;
the original bill proposes TO amend but two
sections lie referred particularly TO the pro-
vision against the drinking by "whiskered mi
nOrs."
Mr.. BROWN saw no propriety in the sub
sttutc. If the traffic was an evil. he would
face il at once. If not, let us lay these bills
aside and take up other business. As friend
Of the cause Of temperance. he believed that
greater offender, For the old offender in in
temperance was beyond the reach Of reforma-
ton. The first class of dealers in the substi-
tute would but educate the youth of the land
10 become c0nsummate and irretrievable
drunkards. Therefore, If gentlemen desire 10
be effectual in this thing, come up and stop the
traffic fOreyer-not hold out an invitation TO
begin the downward career He should sup
port the bill of the gentlemen from Elkhart
rather than that Of the gentlemen from Marion,
ON account of the considerations taken. twas
more consistent with the professions Of tempe
rance men.
Mr.. RICE. Was the gentleman from Jack
son in favor Of the bill Of the gentleman from
Elkhart:
Mr., BROWN, As between the two, he was
decidedly in favor of that Of the gentleman
from Elkhart. But his honest conviction was.
that even the original bill would contribute no
good 10 the cause Of Temperance: he believed
also. that il would not stand before the courts:
and that was the principal reason for his OPP
position. He would not deny his vote or his
word to any measure that would promote the
cause Of Temperance. But if he should be
mistaken IN his estimate Of the bill, he hoped
ii would pass, and be enforced and supported
by the people of the State.
Mr.. GREGORY Of Warren liked the law Of
1853. lie would patch that law up. since gen
tlemen were 30 tim0r0uS-sO much afraid of
positive acts here. lie was opposed TO the sub
was objected 10 the original bill, that il was
prohibitory but the substitute was the most
prohibitory of the two. He preferred the
slighter amendments Of the law of 1859. Pc
titions signed by thousands and tens of thou
sands were constantly coming I'm here for the
passage of this very bill. He himself had no
Interior designs in connection with this ques-
ton. His measure of credit or discredit had
been filled UP in this House. He cared only
for the public good, He would have the House
act like men with conscenceS and clear heads.
Cheers in the lObbies-represse by the Speak
er as an infraction of the Rules Of the House,
He would say, support the right and repress
the wrong. lie would amend the law Of 1859
by adding stringency in regard 10 selling on
the Sabbath. and selling to minors, etc.
Mr.. RICE came from a constituency of tenn
perance men. One class of petitions from his
county asked for the provisions of the Shney
bill. lie might disagree with some Of his con-
stituents on this question. He was a friend of
the Temperance cause. Ii was the duty Of the
legislature TO throw restrictions around the
allurements TO drink. He would not support
the original bill, because, whilst il recon-
mended the principle of license il was in fact
prohibitOry bill. Prohibition would not re-
move the evil, if il were not supported by the
public sentiment. He instanced the negro-ex-
clusion laws Of this state, The liquor law, IS
it stands, was better than the bill ofMr. shuey.
lie reclted that provision Of the substitute
which distinguishes In favor Of f,rmented malt
liquors who could point 10 greatly injurious
intOXications amongst the beer-drinkng Ger
mans He would curb beer selling by
license, aud enclose it within the folds of the
law. Then he would reduce the number Of
dram-Shops by q heavier tax, He would en-
courage the drinking Of beers and native wines
and discourage and cut down the number of
drinking places Of the more dangerous class
He also recited the several provisions of the
substitute.
Mr.. WRIGHT defined his position on the
subject Of temperance subject which seems
now prominent in the minds Of the people
From perhaps every county In the State ex-
eept his own, temperance petitions had been
sent in here; and neither his county nor him.
sell were wanting IN friendlneSs to the cause
Of temperance. His experience in the army
convinced him that no prohibition would pre-
vent either drinking or the traffic in drinks
He would vote for the most stringent law that
would be etiectual. lie had no fear of the po-
lItical influence OF the liquor dealers. That
was tried at the last general election. He
would have reformation in temperance 10 be-
gin in the household, as suggested by Mr.
Rice. But, a. between the substitute and the
original bill, he preferred the former. He pro-
posed conservatism on this question, and
would vote for the best bill we could get
Mr.. SliU EI. aScribed the authorship of this
BILL not 10 himself. but TO the enlightened pub
lie judgment of the State. He described
wherein the bill proposed to amend the exist
illS act vi loJ', Inc people nad found IN IL
no protection from the entertainments of In
temperance. and they had bowed TO il a long
a. they could. Hence the bill simply makes
this provision: that any person DESTROYS of
license, shall procure majority Of the legal
voters of his ward or township To sign his De-
iitlon, and file il in the County Auditors office
six days before the meeting Of the Board of
County Commissioners where his application
Is made. lie declared that i; was not intended
TO be prohibitory law; though il might so op-
crate in some parts Of the State, He replied to
Mr.. Newcombs allegations against the eff
cheney Of the Neal Dow Maine Liquor Law.
Ii was a good indication, that the people Of the
state of Maine bad not repealed it yet: and
that lava copy Of twas now in force in
the State Of Iowa, and effective in the suppress
sion of the traffic. He was not for the Beecher
doctrine alleged by Mr.. Newcomb :-Encour-
age beer. and discourage whisky: but he would
10 right. He replied generally to the objec-
lions urged against the bill. He desired 10
come 10 the vote on all these questions: and
hoped all amendments would be voted down.
- that the House might establish the princi-
pie that a majority Of the people shall govern
license.
Mr.. BROWN moved 10 lay the substitute on
the table.