The Pickens sentinel. [volume] (Pickens, S.C.) 1871-1903, 1892-12-15
A TEST VOTE.
PROHIBlTiONlSTS SHOW UP With
TWENTY-EIGHT MAJORITY.
One-Sided Debate on tie Measures to
Stop the Liquor Ira Observation-Disclosures
Vote and Say Nothing

hibitionists won signal victory tonight
on the first round of the fight on the
Childs bill. The vote was 20 to 42
against striking out the enacting words
of the bill.
The Perry bill, OH which the opposi-
ton expect to develop their strength,
has not yet come up fo1 consideration,
AMI it is not until cher that the Anti.
Prohibltionists expect to develop their
full strength. The ProhibtionisIs have
their full strength of those present on
the bill as whole, and the prevailing
opinion is that they will lose when the
substitutes are considered. The fight
today was peculiar and uncommon.
The tactics Of the Prohlbitlonlsts
seemed to be to let the bill take care of it,
sell and to offer no argument in It's sup.
port. They were apparently confident
and thought they could afford to let the
Childs bill go through as a cut-and-dried
affair, The opposition made a splendid
fight and offered sound and logical argl.-
ment against the passage of the bill.
The Charleston delegation led the light,
and Messrs Sullivan, Topper and Geo.
f. Won kolnitz, Jr. made splendid areu-
ments. The best prepared was that OF
Mr.. j. Z. Thomas, Jr. of Columbia.
Messrs Youmaus of Hampton, Shuman
OF Greenvllle, aud Rivers, colOred, of
Beaufort County, made arguments. Mr..
Roper, who introduced The bill, made a
brief statement. Up to this time Mr..
NGttles is Leading tho prohibition forces.
The Blease bill was killed.
At 1O.45 Speaker Jones announced
that the especial order" of the day, the
Chllds prohibition Bill, was in order.
Reading Clerk Withers, had Just finished
reading the committees bill, when Mr..
Blease arose and asked that the enact
ing words of the bill should be stricken
out, and the prohibition bill heretofore
introduced by him should be inserted.
MIR. Bleas started out by explaining
his present 20 '!ti0n As compared with
his position last year. lie would not
vote for any bill that would not prohibit.
and he would not he a party to any de-
ception. The prohibition mai }, itv was
far ahead. Why should we attempt TO
regua the sale Of liquor when e 'pa. / :
PIE haze demanded thatdjdbut S, =. !, '1,e peo
cGHr;Ho cGH;o ii ipi;GGGrSitsmeH i,7Gris my put myself on re-
,},;Ssu lis l;tyoiiiiG prohibition.
Under the rules Of the House MIR,
Blcasc succeeded in side. tracking The
committees report aud in bringing be.
fore the House tho bill he prepared last
summer. No argument, he said, was
necessary to show the evils Of ,he liquor
traffic. There WAS no use to have q
law on the statute book for which the
punishment was not proportionatc to the
crime. IL was the only way to enforce
such law. A prohibition bill can never
be too strict for mau who is in favor
~E ~ L. A.
and nothing else.
Section o. his bull, he said provided
for the rigid enforcement Of the law.
His bill provided that Onc-half Of the lin e
should go to the lntormcr. This was
done TO secure prosecution. In that
way only, could the law lc enforced
The other half OF the fine would 90 to
the tree schools. You may say that
$1,000 is too much Of a line; lihe can
never be too heavy. Such legislation IS
necessary. You cennot make your
laws too strict. My county has in
structcd men to vote for prohibition and
nothing else. | am here to day as an
advocate prohibitions. If my bill had
been reported back, as it should have
been l would not have introduced
my subtitute, but L could nOtstand
hofAiS my Dlll CuOkCu W NCalI.
Whatever the result may he my duty
has been done.
u was circulated through this hall last
year tina! l. promised Mr.. Chllds that |
would vote for prohibition. | never
made such a statement. l nave over
Mr.. Childs's signature the statement
that never promised him to vote Tor
prohibition. Mr.. Chlds writes that |
ntn L., II
ton.
Mr.. Beasc then red letter from Tx.
Senator Joseph l.. Keitl in which he
said that Mr.. Childs had told him that
Mr.. Bleasc had promised TO vote Tor
prohlbtlop. am very glad that | have
the opportunity OF denying the charge,
and can say that never did Mr.. Childs
attach his name TO truer words. | have
done my duty.
Mr.. McWhitc explained that tn. com.
mittec could not get the bills.
MIR. Duncan, OF Ncwb':rry. secretary
OF the committee, SAID that Mr.. Bleasc
declined to appear before the {, mmit.
tee.
Mr.. Blcase SAID that he had a li.ht to
present the case b"ore he House and
not the committee.
Mr.. Roper, Marlboro, made his dcblt
on the floor OF the House ln advocacy
OF the Childs bill. The Representatives
were here to carry out the will of the
people. We re here to rcsulats the
sale OF liquor. We are here upon the
verge OF great revolution. He did uot
rise Tor buncOmbe; he wunIeu no pollti.
Cal glory. lie came here to do what he
WI pledged to do and nothing more.
MIR. Hill, chairman OF the special COM
miLtee, said that the committee reported
almostunanimouslY against all OF her bills
excepting that known as The Cllilds bill.
Mr. Nett(es, o' Clarendon, the father
OF one of the bills, SAID that as he under.
stood the Bleas2 bill it was not prohi-
ton bill. 1t was too radical. In the
first place the fine was too gtcat. We
90 not propose to introduce any sub.
stitute bills, and tomorrow amendments
will be offered to the Roper bill by which
all revenue from the dispensaries will 90
into the county and State treasures re.