The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1885-12-17

THURSDAY, DEC. II, 1885.
TERMS:
3NEYEAR....r-.. r-..-....... ..............-01.0o
sIxMoNTHs.. .................--. $50.
Two Dollars IL not paid In advance.
The Anderson Committee, appointed
to urge the passage of the County OPP
tion Bill, went to Columbia on Tuesday
oflast week, and remained until Friday.
The Committee organized, on motion OF
Mr.. E, B. Murray. by electing Col. J. W.
Norris Chairman, and Nj. @. O. Feath-
erston Secretary. Messrs. ]. W. Norris,
G. q. Featherston, R. s. Hill, L. P.
Smith, a. G. Lattimer, E. B. Murray,
E.,P Earle, S. i. Eskew,.J. b. Hutchi-
son, Rev. J. W. Wollipg, Rev. S. Lander,
aud Rev. j. W. Major were present.
Messrs. j. q. Clinkscales, J. E. Brea-
zsale, q. F. Tolly, G. E. Prince, L. E.
Campbell and j. L. Snipes were added
to the Committee. The COMMITTEES had
conference with the Anderson delega-
tion, and also went before the Senate
judiciary Committee. They also for.
mally requested Senator Moore to intro
duce and press the Bill in the Senate.
On Thursday morning the Bill come up
for action in the House, and on 8 mo.
ton to strike out the enacting words of
the Bill, Messrs. Scudday and Watson
spoke against, while Col. Rucker spoke
for the motion. The vote on this motion
stood 81 for and Sc against the motion.
Mr.. Wilson, of Spartanburg, then
moved to indefinitely postpone the Bill.
He and Mr.. Aldrich spoke in favor Of
the motion while Mr. Boggs and MIR.
scudday spoke against it. The vote on
this stood IS for and 81 against the mo-
tion. Col. Rucker moved to reconsider
this vote aud to lay the motion on the
table so as to finally kill the measure.
The House by tie vote refused to lay
the motion on the table, and it was with.
drawn. a subsequent effort to reconsid-
er this vote was laid on the table By a
vote Of so tc A. Throughout the con-
test in the House, Messrs. scudday,
Watson and Clinkscales, voted in favor
of the Bill, while Col. Rucker voted
against it. We publish below synopsis
Of Mr.. Scudday's admirable speech. Mr..
Watson also made strong and effective
speech for the Bill, and showed the utter
most diligence throughout the fight.
We regret that neither his nor Col.
Fuckers speeches we're reported, SO We
& cannot present them to our readers. Col.
Rucker's speech criticised the Bill and
the motives of the men who favored it.
He deprecated the spirit which would
mix prohibition with Sunday School and
Chnrch, and contended that the fact that
"a petition with probably less than 200
I white men on it and about 1900 negroes,
the most Of whose names were in the
. name handwriting, had been sent to the
legislature, was evidence that the people
of the county did not want the election,
although the were petitions there from
some 1900 white voters, and more than
5O0ladies asking for it. His speech was
severely disapproyed BY all Of the citi-.
szens of Anderson who we're present, as
far as ne heard an expression from them.
Mr.. Scudday's speech was as follows:
Mr.. SPEAKER: I trust, Mr.. Speaker,
that the House will come to the consid-
eration of this bill with that degree of
S candor and fairness that its Importance
demands. Nothing but deep convic.
tion that this measure has not been
| eqnalled by any other before this House
in Importance and realization of the
responsibility resting upon me as its
author, impel me to ask the indulgence
of this body while I proceed to give to it
my reasons for its support.
Unfortunately principle has been in
iected into human legislation that I great,
IL deplore. mean the Idea that legis-
lation must not precede public sentiment.
It is we'll for US that the moral legislation
given us by the Great Lawgiyef of the
Universe did not proceed upon that
principle; if it had, to-day We would
net have the decalogue and those great
moral laws that We all so much admire;
but be that as it may / assert upon this
floor that it is more dangerous for legisla.
tion to be behind public sentiment, or to I
undertake to throw itself in the way Of
the advance of an enlightened public
opinion upon great moral question. Il
We only ask that legislation keep apace
with public opinion. So far in this State
il has done 80. The enactment of the
license law was to restrict the traffic in
obedience to public sentiment, and 80
with the present local option law-not
considered as final enactments on the
subject, but merely to bridge temporary
chasm, and to keep apace with the ad-
vance Of pubic sentiment; and now, as
necessary result of such legislation, the
next step that,an educated public senti-
ment is calling for is local option by
counties. Let US see to it that whilst We
laYoid legislating ahead of public senti.
lment, we at least keep up with it.
] propose to discuss this bill by consid-
ering it from three standpoints and thus
answer the argument already made on
this floor upon similar bill. It is said
it is moral question and should be re-
Eferred to the church. It is too late in
the history of this government to argue
that morality should be eliminated from
the halls of our legislation. The vital
connection between it and the cause of
government is recognized in the Consti-
tuition of our State when it says no one
who denies the existence of 8 Supreme
Being shall ever hold Office in this State,
and when it prohibits the existence of
lotteries. Whilst our government can
Enot foster the interests of any one religi-
Eous sect or denomination under the Con-
sttiissution, yet We must admit that it is q
great moral agent, itself designed to lift
up the people to higher plane Of moral
existence, by repressing evil and uphold.
ing the good. Why, Mr.. Speaker. mo.
oS klso