The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1897-03-03

against the case. Inc Dill WOuIG mol
stand. 1t would be a destructive blow
to the dispensary law. Hundreds OF
samples would be s8nt in and it would
end in the profits Of the State all be,
ing paid out to express companies in
charges on samples; the State had to
paw all those charges.
Mr.. Simkins agreed in the main
with what Mr. Patton had said. He
was not there to attack the dispensar7
law. He Was there to testify that the
people 10 his county were satisfied
with the present law. But pass = 6
and there would be another case for
the courts to decide. Past strife would
be renewed. Personal liberty was
dear to them al. Il a man desired to
violate the law, he could buy liquor
from the dispensary and sell il.
Mr.. kinard wanted TO sound q note
OF warning to the friends OF the dis
pensary Law. This bill was to perfect
the law; it represented the views Of
those who were most intimately : con-
nected with the law. He wanted them
to see that no amendments were tack
ed to the bill.
Josh Ashley-Ifa favor the dispensary
/ iaw. Do You believe that this first
section will stand the test OF the
courts; dou't you believe it is in con
fict with the United States Ccnstitu-
ton; haven't you sworn to support it
Mr.. Stevenson wanted to state why
| he favored Mr. Pattoa's motion. he
Wished to know If the proposed bill
would remedy anything. Il It did
net, it should be laid in It's grave at
once. This bill was merel Y TO make
the dispensary law an inspection law.
An inspection IA ~ was not necessarily
unconstitutional, bat this bill would
not pass mus,er as such law. The
United States court had already said
so in almost 50 many words. Il would
not do to say that all liquor was detri-
mental to the public health, when the
State went into the business herself
and established a concern you could
smell 50 yards off. The Safe
could not say that liquor was poison
Gus while the State sold it. This bill
would never stand. He had eudeav-
ored to enforce the dispensary law in
his town. 1t was not good policy to
keep putting the court to the necessity
of knocking down unconstitutional
acts. We here avoW that this bill IS
for purpose. TIE court will not be
slapped in the face continually. 1t
would prejudice the court against the
State.
Mr.. Garris was surprised to see the
wide range OF this discussion. He was
sorry that some members had found
it necessary to criticise the governor
and attorney general, who had per
feet right to give their opinions and
they should respect those opinions
He denied that he was attem pting to
pass an unconstitutional act. They
were not attempting to fight the Uni
ted States court. They were attempt
ing to lead another course. He did
not deny that It was an Inspection
law and that was wherein that It was
constitutional. The present governor
was the one TO whom be had refer
enc.
Mr.. Cushnan said that all friends
of the dispansary should stand by this
bill. If it was killed, it would be
goodby to the dispensary.
Mr.. Price could not agree with Mr..
Patton's position as to the samples.
Mr.. Bacot would vote to strike out
the enacting words. He helda opin-
ion Of his own, which be could not
surrender to that Of the attorney gen
eral as presented in this bill. His
State pride had been somewhat hurt
by the State being turned down in the
courts. This bill would do nothing
more than be fruitful of litigation.
1t would not accomplish what it was
desired to accomplish. Instead OF
stopping litigation, it would bring that
very thing about.
mir. Pollock was sorry that Mr.. Pat
ton had cas-. severe structures upon the
governor and attorney general. TIE
gentleman from Richlaad had no
more right to give his legal opinion
and invade the judicla, department
than the governor had to prepare this
bill. Under other sections OF the Con-
stitution the governor had the right to
bring this matter 10 the attention OF
the general assembly as he would in
message. Many o; them believed
honestly and truly that the bill was
unconstitutional. da said they were
not trying to evade s1e decision OF
the court. AL liquors sold n the
dispensary were tested by the chemist,
as was required OF other liquors under
this bill.
Mr.. Stevenson remarked that that
was IN the law when the supreme
court rendered its decision.
Mr.. Pollock was satisfied that the
court would hold this to be "a iuspec
ton law. No one had proved to hin
that il was rot an inspection Iaw.
Mr.. Ilderton said as long as they
had to fight blind tigers or tigers with
their eyes open they would have Iltl
CATION. Lawyers were often mlstak-
en- in passing upon the constitution
atty Of a measure. The attorney
general, who was elected 70 give them
legal advice, had sent the bill to them.
Every man should be careful how ne
voted tonight. or the gates would be
opened 10 every law breaker IN South
Carolina. Tney should stand by their
homes and the leading men OF the
State were in sympath7 with the bill.
He feared ere Iong, if the bill was
killed, they would nave tae barron
system bacz again,
jIr. Livingston said the Gispensary
WAS admittedly the accepted policg OF
the State. The United States court had
said that q certain portion OF this law
IS unconstitutional The attorney
general OF the State, who was the le-
gal adviser Of the 6.ate, presented 3
measure which be said remedled the
defects and made the law co0form TO
the decision OF the court. The COVER
Tor had the right-a perfect right-to
present such a oil, not ior the pur-
nose of violating the United Safes