Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1899-02-18

VA0a41s ~~~
pensary, were not entitled to receive
the same proportion of dispensary
money as those counties that furnish
ed large profits.
Senator Scarborough stated that his
county, for instance, (Horry) was a
poor one. 1t had no dispensary
but it paid taxes into the state treas
ury, and those taxes were used for the
benefit of the whole state. The dis
pensary law gives to each couty por-
ton of the profits from every dispen-
sary within its borders. The balance
of the profit to 60 into the state treas
ury, where they became common
fund, and he thought that Horny coun-
ty was justly entitled to her share on
basis of enrolment.
On the question of sticking to the
distribution by enrolment, the senate
voted 81 to II. The result of the vote
is to continue the present plan-ap'
portionment according to enrolment.
Senator Love voted with the majority.
Tuesday night was given up TO a
lengthy discussion of the Archer
amendment to the dispensary law.
The principal object of the bill was to
allow counties that have dispensaries
to get rid of them, when they 80 de.
sire, by means of elections, held upon
petitions. Mr.. May6eld sought to in
clude the right to vote on the question
of local option also. A number OF
other amendments were offered; but
they were voted down one after anoth-
er, until.the question was on the adop-
lion of. Mr.. Archer's proposition. The
Archer bill was passed to third read
ing by a vote of 20 to IA. Senator
Love voted for the bill.
The house devoted nearly all of Tues
day to debate on the liquor question !;
but reached no decision. The debate
was continued on Wednesday, the
question under discussion being Mr..
r. B. A. Robinson's local option bill.
Mr.. c. P. Sanders had amended by
substituting the Archer bill, after the
enacting words, and Mr.. Hydrick had
further amended it with some provis'
ions intended to take the dispensary
entirely out of politics.
1t was while the question WAS In
this shape, according to the report IN
the Columbia State, that "Mr. Mellow,
of York, spoke against the bill. He
said that he would not be doing his
constituents justice if be did not ex.
press their views. He congratulated
the house that there had been no in
lection of personal feeling and strife
into the debate. The man who would
tear open an old wound in the discus
sion of matters of such grave import
ance ought to be regarded as public
enemy.
"The dream of prohibition has van
ished and gone to its grave, and he
would not touch upon it.
"He addressed himself to Mr.. G. Z.
Sanders amendment. He said that he
did not think it proper to refer the
question to the people, for they had
sent the representatives here to speak
for them. He was not unmindful of
the imperfections of the dispensary
law. But has any law been perfect
when first enacted? That bulwark of
liberty, the law as to trial by jury,
has been growing for centuries and is
still imperfect. Would it be right on
account of its imperfections to eliml-
nate it from the statute books? The
law in regard to education is imper-
feet, and shall it be done away with
on that account? Shall the dispen-
sary be doomed because it is imper-
feet? Why should not the dispensary
law be approached in the same man
ner as other laws? Why not approach
it with a desire to give it q fair trial
"The law has not had fair trial.
The finest legal talent has been
brought to bear to pull it down and
turn it over; but it has gained friends
from it's former enemies. He himself
had been very bitterly opposed to it at
first. He said that the sentiment of
the people could be obtained by the
passage of the Archer resolution which
passed the senate, the bill granting the
right to vote for removal of the dis
pensary from objecting counties. He
was opposed to submitting the question
of high license. The. hnman mind
cannot throw enough restrictions
around the business of an individual
to make it in any way conform to law.
"Mr. Blythe asked if Mr.. Mellow
would be willing to vote for the senate
bill when it came over, instead of MIR.
Sanders's amendment, which is identi-
cal.
Mr.. Mellow said that he would. He
then continued that he was in favor
of the dispensary law with needed
amendments. He thought that Mr..
Archer's amendment was necessary.
If something of the kind were not
adopted, the opposition would keep on
growing and growing until it would
finally wipe out the entire law. Some
thing can be done and should be done
to treat the opposition fairly, or the
opponents will in the end wipe out the
institution"
The house voted the Sanders amend
ment down, and upon adjournment
Wednesday night, the fate of the
Archer bill was still matter of doubt.
The ARCHER BILL.
Important Measure Providing For Local
Self Government.
A.xl.. LII ,>o,,al hx, ho como q