The Daily clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1866-1888, 1884-02-07

the question of prohibiting the traffic in
intoxicating liquors to the qualified cleo
tors of the several counties in this State in
which the traffic is now authorized by law,
was taken up and considered by sections.
Mr. Barksdale moved the bill be RECON-
mitted with instructions to report bill
repeating chapter 80. Code, and providing
for the submission Of the question of
whether LIQUOR shall be sold therein to the
qualified electors of each election precinct
and incorporated town, and regulating the
traffic. The amendment was lost.
Atl:l5 the House adjourned.
EVENING SESSION.
Mr.. Bell moved to reconsider the vote,
whereby the motion of Mr.. Barksdale to re-
commit the bill pending at adjournment,
was voted down.
Mr.. Orr spoke on the subject, and men
toned the amount of revenue now derived
from liquor licenses and its benefit to the
State, and with this revenue withdrawn the
increase in State taxes would be four and
half mills on the dollar, and other articles
must be taxed to meet this increase. On
liquor licenses there was paid into the Au-
ditor's Office $4,000 from Washington
county, and on account of fines $1712. In
Lawrence county, where no whisky license
was collected, the amount of fines was
$IO50. Enough prohibition laws had al
ready been passed to increase the State tax
one-half mill Where was the equity of
counties that paid no licenses into the
treasury drawing their pro rata of this fund
for the benefit of their schools. Other
counties were quoted to refute the state
ment that the amount of fines collected for
misdemeanors was gagged by the amount
of liquor sold.
He cited instances where similar laws
were dead letters, and mentioned Oxford
as one of the places where the sale of whis-
ky was prohibited, and where any one
who wanted it could get it. The town of
Houston was in the same category. On any
public day more drunken men could be
seen in that town than any other portion of
the county. Should the bill pass, persons
now selling liquor under a license would be
closed up and the money they had paid for
their licenses for the unexpired time of
their licenses would be as so much taken
from their pockets with no recompense.
In 1882, the Legislature passed twenty
three prohibitory bills All of the towns
save one had petitioned the Legislature for
the repeal of the laws. He wanted the law
viewed from all standpoints, not from a
moral point of view only. We're it in his
power to remove from the limits of this
State the giant evil, he would willingly do
so. He liked to see prohibition in the fami-
ly circle, at the side board, and when it
came home to families; this could be done
by education.
Mr.. Orr's speech was forcible and sus-
tanned by facts and figures, and at times
eloquent.
Mr.. Watson followed. He said the pas
sage of the bill would give the people an
opportunity to decide the question for
themselves In the election at Corinth and
in Alcorn county the election for a men,
Der of the board of supervisors and mem
Der of the Legislature from Alcorn, the
question hinged upon prohibition or no
prohibition, and the latter won by an over
whelming majority. The friends of the
measure had done their best to keep poll
tics out of this question, and he did the
Republicans this justice that the best man
who ever sat to decide upon the statutes OF
this State was the offspring of Republican
votes. He did not like to hear SO much
reference to the liquor laws not being en-
forced in the State, but he said it was the
fault of those who did not regard the oaths
they had taken to. sustain the laws of the
land.
Regarding the injustice of prohibition
counties receiving pro rata of the whisky
fund he referred to the Constitution which
provides for the disbursement of all fines
growing out of the liquor traffic. Nc
whisky or malt liquors were manufactured
in the State and fifteen millions of dollars
were drained from the resources of the State
annually to bring in an unmitigated evil tC
the State. The United States did not gran
to any one license to sell liquors in any
State in opposition to the laws of the State
That was the legal proposition. He sale
the statement that prohibition did no gooC
was a mistake. He spoke of Maine as
State where less liquor was used than il
any other State and prohibition had don,
that State an immense amount of good
The Main law had increased the prosperit,
one hundred fold.
In Georgia local option prevailed il
three-fourths of the counties, and nothing
would have the people to repeal it, Mer
chants who were opposed to it at first, FOL
fear it would hurt their business, were nov
strongly in favor of it. There was les:
crime in these localities, and the none!
that had formerly been expended for whis
ky was now invested in new buildings ant
Improvements.
Mr.. Mullins moved the previous question
call sustained and the motion to reconside
was lost by vote of Sc ayes to 81 nays.
Mr.. Orr moved to postpone the question
until the 4th of March next
Mr.. Mullins moved to table. Carried.
Mr.. Bell, at $50, moved to adjourn. Car
ried.