The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1901-03-02

10 be applied to those who want dispen-
sary abolished? We see that in this case
less than one third OF he people voted
for adjustment while there are petitions
from LEO citizens aslting for the dispen-
sary. A great deal has been said about
satndng our representatives. say the
representative who comes from the coun-
try can, by reason Of his not being in
the heat of the conflict, see moro clearly
than the others the true status of the
case.
The people who took nc part in tho
primary are not bound by what the others
have done.
THE dispensary is q good thing for
orality, for the funds. and for the schools.
| am surprised to hear this abuse of the
ministers of the gospel because they sup
port the dispensary. Don't these gem
tlemen here know that they only do so
because prohibition is not practicable. ;"
Mr.. Mclean asked If 1t was not better
for one trying 10 follow Chris to take
the advice OF ministers instead of these
lawyers who many OF them are not mem
bers of Of any church at all. U-aughter).
Judge Graham continued. saying that
we had nothing to do with what the
Senate had decided
NO MONOPOLY ON RELIGION.
Judge Allen: ! do not understand that
the gentlemen fovoring dispensary have
monopoly on religion. / feel they are
like the man who is so demonstrative
toward his wife in public. Q4aughter).
Il a against dispensaries out and out
believe they lower the moral tone OF g
community"
Asked by Mr.. Curtis, he said he was
for prohibition, and had cast his firsC
vote for it, in 1881
1T has been said that the dispensary
added one month TO the school term. Don't
you know the people will never be willing
to give that up and be taxed for that
months school? consider that the dis
pel.sary has tendency 10 fasten the
liquor traffic uEon u county. Today there
is not bar-room from Goldsboro 10 Will
nlngton, | say the prohibition sentiment
is growing, and it is wrong TO lesislat:
against this growing sentiment
IF you will enforce the laws in regard
TO bar-keepers, il will promote healthier
growth OF the prohibition feeling than
the dispensary system"
Mr.. Smith with the gentleman from
Wayne, voted in 1881 for prohibition.
shall always vote that way, IL giving my
individual opinion. But as long as l live
in a Democratic community | will always
support the will of the majority. l can't
see how man can oppose 6.spensary.
when it comes to a question between that
or barrooms.
II am not here to bow down 10 any
election and set aside the moral of the
question, care not for the technicallty.
;.,. ha
people of Fayetteville? Like Jackson a
Charlottesville, those people opposed to
the abolishing of dispensary, when they
saw a position had been taken which put
them at a disadvantage, retired. TO the
swamrs, if you please, but they came up
with a flank movement OF 1000 names
TO a petition.
81 am opposed to dispensaries on a
matter of principle. have yet TO take
my first drink of whiskey, but IL the peo-
pie CT q community want dispensary
respect their wishes. Ii this bill passes.
it means open bar-rooms in Fayette-
Vile"
Mr.. Stubs said that in 1899 an cleo
ticn was held in Greensboro, upon the re-
quest of the representatives. Only white
citizens voted. The result was for dis
pensaly. The opponents came to that Leg
islature and asked them to take action.
''They complained OF many Irregular
Ties. But we then voted TO sustain the
will of that majority as expressed by the
vote OF the primary. Let us be conss
tent.
''As for the fact that the dispensary
gives money 10 the school fund, | say,
you defraud the fathers CT the county i'll
order to educate the rosterity."
This sensational utterance closed the
debate.
MI. Owen, OF Sapson offered substi-
tute to abolish the dispensary AT Fay
otteyile, TO prohibit the sale or manu-
facturo OF liquor in the county, and to
provide for the question being submitted
at the next general election. If voted
down, local option shall prevail in the
township Of Fayetteville.
This was lost, MIR. Owen being the only
o neto vote for it..
The question was then on the bill on
its second reading.
Mr.. Mclean called ayes and noes, and
on the VOC, the bill failed to pass it's
second reading by 40 10 30.
The ayes were: Messrs. Allen OF Wayne.
Barco Barnhill eBasley, Benbow, Blount.
Blythe, Carr, Carraway, Carlton, Carson,
Craig, Dees, Ebbs, Green, Hartley, lsbell,
Lawrence, Little, Long, Aiacketham,
Mann, Mastin, Mauney, Mcfarland, Nc
liver, Morphew, Nash, Nicholson, Petrec,
Reinhardt, Robinson Rountree, Stubbs,
Taylor. Thompson, Watts, White of Jones,
Williams, Marlborough.
The noes were: Messrs Alexander, Al
len of Columbus, Beddingheld, Blalock,
Bradsher, Brim, Britain, Burnett, Gallo
way. Collins, Conor, Curtis, Daniels OF
Vance, Dean, Duls, Duncan, Ellen, Fields,
Gather Garrett, Gattis, Graham, Hail,
Harris, Hood, Lane, Mcintosh, Mclean,
Morgan Oliver, Owens, Page, Parker, Pat
terson, Pearson, Ross, Rothrock, Russell,
Seawell, Shannonhouse, Shelton, Simms,
Smith, Spa!nhonr. Stevenson, Ward, Wea-
yer, Whitaker OF Forsyth, White Of Hall
fax, Wilson.
The following pairs were announced,
Hayes, aye, with Hoey, no; Winston, aye,
with Willard no; Stewart. aye, with
Baughtridge, no; Nichols, aye, with Bald
win, NO.
The following explained their Yates;
Messrs. Alexander. Beddingfield. Blalock,
Britain. Carraway, Carlton, Collins,
Craig, Curtis, Ebbs, Gattis, Hood. Law
renee. Mclean, Morgan. Parker, Robin
ntNbC