Nevada County picayune., 1891-11-19
ANOTHER PRIESTHOOD OVER
 TAKEN.


 the Senate 10 Democrats voted against it and only , for it. In this case the Democratic party put itself on record as opposed to "States' Rights" and in the favor of Red Liquor. Every Democrat from Arkansas voted against the Bill.-The Peoples Tribune.
 Above virtually charges that 8l Democrats in the last House of Rep resentatives opposed, and only favored the "origiuaI package leg islation, and that by the votes upon that subject the Democratic party, including all the members from Arkansas, put themselves upon rec ord against giving the States the right to control and regulate the sale of articles of commerce trans ported from another State or county in original packages. The Congress sional record shows the charge to be utterly false.
 Here are the facts; Our Supreme Court had decided that articles of commerce transported from one State to another, could not be taxed uor the sale thereof prohibited by any State unless authorized by Con- gress. Some of the ablest lawyers in Congress denied the soundness of the decision, claiming that upon de- liberation said court would reverse its decision. These, and few who favored free whisky, opposed any legislation. Bill winch finally became a law originated in the Senate and only related to intoxicating H. quors. After passing the Senate the House referred It to judiciary committee, which reported substl- tute, giving the states the same pow CT over any article of c0mmerce.' Substitute was agreed to by vote of ll3 yeas to 97 nays, which indi- cated that the House preferred the substitute. The bill as thus amend ed was then passed by the House by vote of l76 yeas to 3S nays; of the nays there were only 3l Democrats, not S1, as Mir Bush says. MT. Breckinridge was the only member from Arkansas who voted may. v Rogers was absent and did not vote, but as he was on the committee re- porting the substitute it is fair to assume he favored it. Messrs. Me Rae and Peel voted yea, for the bill and not against it. This was the only vote in the House that could be considered test vote of the sense of that body as to such legislation. It was the only time when negative vote would have defeated the meas ure. The Senate disagreed to the House amendment, and a conference committee resulted, and a majority of this committee (composed of members from both House and Sen ate) reported recommending that the House recede from the amend ment This report was adopted by the House by vote of l9 yeas to 92 nays, members from Arkansas voted nay, but this was not vote against the blll, but simply an ex. pression of preference for the House bill. A negative vote on the report would not have prevented legislation, as it would simply have shown that the House insisted upon it's amend ment, and another conference then ordered. Many of the most earnest advocates of such legislation, as shown by their speeches voted not to recede from the general bill of the House who would have voted for the Senate bill, if in the considera- tion of the question it had reached stage when they had to choose be- tween that and no legislation. That time never came.
 The House bill was right, and would have given the States more rights than the other. To illustrate, Arkansas has undertaken to prevent the sale of weapons and pistol car tridges, as we'll as to control the li- quor traffic. Why should nos the law have been made broad enough to cover these articles of commerce as we'll as liquor: Was 1t not clearly the duty of the members from Arkansas to insist upon law that would prevent tue notification of any of our statutes:
 In conclusion let the people re- member that the Tribune always mis- represents when it discusses the record of Democrats.