Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1898-02-12

citizens did not have a right to do.
He believed that the dispensary and
the sale of liquor as beverage under
any system was wrong. He also de-
nounced the bringing in of wagon
loads of liquor for the purpose of
debauching the youth of the state.
He thought, also, the idea of not SELL
ing to drunkards was wrong. In his
opinion the state should not sell liquor
to a man until be became drunkard.
SIS it right to legalize that which
makes man do wrong?' Mr.. McCul-
Tough asked, land then punish the
man for doing wrong ?" 1t is useless
to say that a prohibitory law will not
prohibit. Neither does the law against
murder. "If this law is not right,
then stand to your colors and stand to
your votes. When that vote whereby
the house refused to kill this bill was
announced the other day, prayers went
up for your acts. Prohibition is going
to come just so surely as God rules"
Mr.. Crum, of Barnwell, spoke
against the bill and in favor of the
dispensary law.
Mr.. Smith, of Sumter, hailed with
delight the making of the issue. He
did not see how this could be matter
of expediency. The question should
be the attitude of the state to wrong.
He was astonished to see state officials
rejoicing in the increase of the liquor
business and recommending means TO
increase it still further. The whole
question is whether the state is willing
to temporize with admitted wrong.
Mr.. Mauldin, of Greenville, said
that if he was a prohibitionist he was
prohibitionist straight, and on that
line argued for the adoption of the
Livingston amendment.
Mr.. Childs arose to question of
personal privilege and denied the in
famous charge that the ministers OF
the state were operating with the bar
keepers in opposition to the dispensary
law.
The vote on the Livingston amend
ment resulted yeas 80, nays 73. Messrs.
deLoach aud Johnson voted for the
amendment and Messrs. Epps and
Witherspoon voted against it.
The committee on adjournment
named Wednesday, February 16, as
the day selected.
Upon motion of Mr.. Childs, debate
on his bill was continued until Wed
nesday.
Among the bills to pass third
reading were
Mr.. de Loach's joint resolution to
authorize the treasurer of York to pay
out certain surplus funds of Broad
River township on warrants for re-
pairs to roads and bridges.
Bill to amend can Act to declare
intoxication, drunkenness, the use of
vulgar, obscene or profane language
misdemeanor and prescribe punish
ment therefor, $50 as to include the
discharge, after night time, of any gun
or pistol, and to prevent shooting
matches within 100 yards of any pub
lie highway.
Senate joint resolution to require
the treasurers of York, Spartanburg
and Cherokee to pay the per diem and
mileage to commissioners appointed
by the governor.
Senate bill to make the embezzle-
ment of public or private funds fel-
ony and prescribe penalty therefor.
Bill to amend section 833 Of the
statutes of 1898, changing the judicial
districts of magistrates in York coun-
ty.
Bill to amend an act to provide for
the appointment of magistrates so far
as the same relates to York.
Mr.. E. D. Smiths bill to require
tuition fees at all state colleges, and
provide that pupils who are unable to
pay tuition shall give notes, was de-
bated at length and killed by vote
of 80 to 3S. Messrs. Witherspoon and
johnson voted for the bill. The vote
against the measure is not recorded.
In THE SENATE.-The proceedings
of the day were of no special interest.
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 9.
In THE HoUsE.-The first matter Of
Importance taken up was the senate
bill to amend the act to require certain
officers to keep an itemized account of
their income by virtue of their Office,
and the bill was passed so as to read
as follows:
Section l. That on and after the passage
of this act, each county officer shall be
required to purchase and keep in his
office, open to public inspection during
office hours, a book in which shall be
kept an itemized account of all money
received by or due to him, whether re-
ceived by him or due to him as salary,
fees or costs, or in any other manner, as
to pay for his services by virtue of his
office: Provided, That nothing herein
contained shall be construed to require
any such officer to demand the payment
of his fees and costs in advance.
Sec. 2. (As in the present act with
the proviso excepting certain counties
stricken OUT.
Sec. 3. That all acts and parts of acts in
conflict with this act be, and the same are
hereby, repealed.
The debate on the Child's bill was
renewed. Mr.. Pollock offered as an
amendment his bill for the regulation
of o. P. shops. The amendment was