The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1885-02-12
Maj. Moore on Prohibition.

sible.
Mai. Moore on Prohibition.
70 the Citizens of Anderson County:
As your Senator l have been asked by
the INTELL1aENcER and Mr.. "Prep,"
two of my constituents, to give to the
public statement of my position on the
bill to submit to the people of the County
the question of License or no License in
the City of Anderson, and my views on
that subject. In answer I have to say
First. That ! fully recognize the right
of citizens to petition for whatever they
may think promotive of the general
good, and when so petitioniug, their re-
quest should be carefully considered by
their Representatives.
Second. In regard to the particular
bill referred to, have to say that had
but little to do with it. I WAS not en-
trusted by petitioners with their petition,
and knew nothing of it till late in the
session-too late, in fact, to legislate in
reference to it, owing to the crowded con.
dition of the calendars of both Houses.
1t was, as I remember, on the l 9Th day of
December that I was first spoken to in
regard to the bill, Mr.. Scudday asking
me to introduce il in the Senate. at
once agreed to do so, and took the bill and
petition for that purpose, reserving the
right to vote for or against the bill when
had examined it; but just then remem-
bering that the Senate had passed res
olution prohibiting Senators from intro.
ducing bills for the remainder of the ses-
sion, I 80 informed Mr.. Scudday, but
further told him that standing commit
tees could introduce bills under the res
olution that such bill would be re
ferred to the Judiciary Committee Of the
Senate; that I was a member of that
Committee, and that I would ask the
members thereof as a special favor to
myself to consider the bill to grant the
members of the House hearing on it,
and if they thought fit, to report it to the
Senate for consideration. Soon after
this interview the Committee met, and /
succeeded in having the bill considered
by them before taking up the regular
business. The members of the House
were at once notified of this action of the
Committee, and requested to appear and
make such statements as they might
| wish. Messrs. Watson and Rucker did
appear before the Committee. Messrs.
Scudday and Clinkscales did not. When
Watson and Rucker had made their
statements and retired, I was asked my
views on the bill. l thanked the Com
| mittee for the consideration of the bill,
for the hearing of the members, and
continued by saying, you know my posi-
tion on this subject; that think it un.
wise to interfere with the local option
law-that good could, in my judgment,
result from it-that no disturbing causes
existed in my County, and had not since
'76-that feared that our unity would
be hazarded by such a law-that 1 knew
nothing of the petition, having had no
opportunity of examining it, but knew
that good men of my County were inter-
ested in the matter of the petition, and
had no doubt they had signed it-that
while I, as an individual, thought the
legislation asked for unwise, l had no
objection to the sending up of the bill
for the consideration of the Senate.
The Committee refused to send up the
bill for these reasons, if remember cor
rectly, /. Because same bill pending in the
House. 2. Bill could not be passed for
want of time. 3. Printing of bill fol
use of the Senate would, under the cir.
cumstances, be useless expenditure Of
money. These reasons, or some of them.
we're endorsed upon the bill, and it re-
turned to the members of the House
This is complete statement of my
doings in regard to the bill in question.
Third. AS to my views on the subject,
I have to say no man entertaius greater
respect for the cause of temperance than
| 1 do. 1t is the cause of morality and
religion, but I doubt the expediency and
propriety of the legislation asked for
It would introduce the cause of temper
ance into politics, and, in my humble
Judgment would divide the white people
who are agreed upon all other political
questions; and in that event it is moi
difficult to perceive that the colored man
would hold the balance of power-thaI
in the zeal of contending parties be
would be courted by both, and that he
would ultimately have the decision oi
the question. If the legislation asked
for would divide the County in the man:
ner indicated, why would it not extend
itself to every other County in the State
Notwithstanding the respect | have tol
temperance and those interested in the
cause, I think it ia destined to become a
political question if the policy of its ad
vocates is carried out, and l believe vii!
be productive of results not anticipated
or desired by the friends of the cause.
JOHN B. MOORE.