The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1903-04-04

y a
x ~ arnendt ,ent Is Mr.. 5tIDas's motion, t.
n reject ali The Senate attlendnients, when
n was But leading up TO Il con ference on tne
y disAk reoifg votes between the two houses
3fi \ d parliamentary manner d 1. !. !.
ltS Mr. T,Uikns, OF the Finance Commitle,e "
by the wa ever LAKES V n 1svIs
Y amendment, He declared that he was q
Il tsnperahcs man, III the sense that ne
was NJ nE TO 20 with the people On !, tn ~
4 bjnct but lie opposed tho Mann plii y. IN
Il atreiiuous Language. He appealed n. for
of the Iionse su'in an,,.
I "a there would beiinothing left for the
4 House to concede, and therefore would
II nave the House cor,ferees at a dlsadvaii-
I M HIDDEN NO OLIVES. 3aJ
n ss Mr.. Eolkes intiniated thai some OF those
4 advocating the Mann sblll desired II IN
order togrelieve tho corporations OF. taxes
and ne proceeded ably to- defend MS pc.
sition. He said he had looked at the bill
j5purely from a revenue standpoint, ana
that was the only proper view TO toke q
assST Ho said ii was 4 cry OF temperance in
"a order that corporations might escape
II open taxation, and he, for one, would new
II S. endorse IT. rs IN his view Of the case,
1.-The financial life Of the State was threat !,
ened IN the Bill He charged tnat I, e ,Sa
u
Il name OF God, OF temperance, and all that
was good and holy. He commended that
VI the passage Of the Mann bill would put
%the red flag upon the doors Of the coun-
try stores. and would disturb . business
4 try districts. Mr.. Folkes made very
strong speech, and pleaded ably with the
III orse to follow precedents with reference
10 dlsaereelng votes TN revenue measures.
b M r. SEB R11IL SPEAKS.
Mr. Sebrell followed Mr., Folkes IN a
HI strong speech In favor(of his substitute ,e
q fl1,d explained itsin detail, arguing with
4 telling force that IT was in the nature Of
ii = a compromise. which he earnestly be-
Ssiieved would solve the liquor question
II once for all In the rural districts, and IN
This Judgment would meet oil the ob'eo-
lions urged against the Mann bill.
q Mr. Sebrell called attention to the adj
mirahl workings OF the dispensary in
~ his town, in so far as It had elevated the
aliduor traffic, but he declared that the
III State could go out of the business and not
N come In contact with Its citizens IN any
VI terprise. He had incorporated the dis-
Il persnry feature to a certain extent IN his
Sbill, because 1t prohibited the drinking Of
laliuuor where Sold and every one knew
i, the evil OF the social feature Of drinking.
ss3ss8 The member made an able and earnest
q Plea for his bill and he reiterated the be,
Ssiief&thnt It would go a long way toward
x settling the question.
MR.. CATIONS POSITION.
n Mr. Cation, Of Alexandria, spoke for the
SEebrell substitute and against the Mann
sSbill ,3 devoting the great portion Of his
II Gpeech to an excoriaton of the latter. II G
q was a. temperance man, but was IN fa-
4 syor8 Of mo such arrangement as was pro-
\. posed In the Mann bill, and thought 1T
y was based on the wrong principle II
was a pretensc which would not DO what
was claimed for It. and later on he de-
~ noinced 1t as makeshift and q subter-
sfuge. 81 d. 81 !,
SS555If prohibition was right in the counties
VI twas right In the cities, and II liquor
WAS N to Z be wiped out In ono section, IT
H should 20 in ali sections. The bill up was
u a revenue one, and the question Of tenn
;psrance should mot BIO Injected to be.
xolbud and confuse .;l IN closing Mr.. Cation
~ devote himself to a considera ton Of the
gSebrell substitute, which he earnestly IA
94Vored and which he declared would be
liz declared fair and just to I'LL the people.
Mr. Duke followed in opposition to the
Mann BILL and made a strong speech, de-
d signed to show that prohibition did not
n prohiblt. III conclusion, Mr.. IA Duke fn-
8Svored the passa SO Of the sebrell substi-
5itute and said it was Iby far the better
x bill OF tho two. Sa.st @
Mr.. Duke submitted the following tn
"A BE, obtained from the Internal Revenue
II Department ct Washington, showing the
3 number Of liquor Licensees granted IN pro-
" llibition States: X 4;
Statement showing the number f$spe-
q Eitl tax payers d = retail and wholesale
& dealers in spirituous and malt liquors IN
A Main ,& Kansas and South Carolina dur
u ing the fiscal year 1909: "a 2Siiss8 X