The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1903-02-06
Tho bill PASSED second reading.
KISSING TIE BIBLE.


the bills to do away with kissing the
Bible in taking oaths came up, Judge
Graham opposed the BILL saying he knew
that it was very unpopular nowadays to
| oppose any change; but he for one was
| perfectly willing to be called an old fogy
| IN matters of this kind He did not think
| mat anything should be done to break
the solemnity of the legal oath provided
Tor by cur forefathers in 1777.s AS 70
| the theory of germs, he believed thar
| the only people ever made sick by germs
| IL this way were those who wanted to
| perjurc themselves.
Mr.. NeWland explained that the COM
| mlttees substitute merely provided that
| oaths taken without kissing the Bible or
| laying the hand upon it should be Just
| as blndlng, and that a person could be
| indicted for perjury in violating an oath,
| even if taken without the Bible. The
| bill did not do away with kissing the
| Bible.
Judge Graham, however, said that the
| bill certainly did allow another method
| of taking an oath besides kissing the
| Bible. This was what he objected to-
| Mr.. Smith also opposed the bill. say
| ing he considered the kissing of the Bible
or laying the right hand upon it had a
| restraining effect, and in many cases pre-
vented perjury.
| Mr.. Mcneil wanted to hear from the
| doctors on the germ side of the question.
| Mr.. Rucker said that he understood
| that the bill did not abolish the kissing
| of the Bible, but was for the purpose of
| reaching a certain class of cases. where
| officers of the law swore persons with
| out the Bible. Many magistrates did
not even have a Bible. He favored the
| bill.
Mr. Gilman thought the best way out
of it would be to furnish all the magis-
| tratcs with Bibles
Dr.. Riddick said that, as a physician
from the standpoint of health, all he
| would say was that he would propose to
add to the word bible" in the bill amy
other old thing"
! DR.. Alexander, of Mecklenburg. stated
| that the danger of contracting disease
| from the practice was very great, and
| that he thought the custom of kissing
| the Bible should be abolished
| MI Guon stated that only the legal
| side of the question had been discussed
! in the committee. He made a very pow
| erful legal argument for the bill, as
| covering eases where tho Bible oath was
not used. Many indictments for per
| jury had actually failed because the let
| ter of The Code had not been complied
with, and guilty persons had escaped
| punishment.
| Judge Graham held that the fact that
| officers of the law did not always com
| ply with The Code was no reason why
| such bill should be passed. He favor
| ell a substitute compelling officers of
| the law to comply with the legal re-
| GUirements. He finally moved the whole
matter be laid on the table. The motion
| prevailed IS to Al.
| WINE FOR HOTEL GUESTS.
| House Bill, to allow hotels of the
| Toxaway Company, Brevard, to furnish
| wine and liquors to their bona fidc
guests.
| Mr.. Aiken spoke to the bill saying that
| this liquor was to be sold to the guests
| only in the original packages These
| guests he said, did more for temperance
| than any other class of people in the
| county. There was law prohibiting the
| Importation of liquor into the county
| from other parts of the State 1t can
| be manufactured there. but can be
| shipped out of the COUNTY only in 70
1
| from Judge Graham, Mr.. Aiken said that
| there had been no petition from the citi-
| zcrs of the county asking for this bill
Mr., Hunter, of Wake, had the clerk
| read a letter from Mr.. J. r. Newton, of
| Pennsylvania, saying petition was be
ing sent up asking that no bar-room be
made possible in Pennsylvania or Brc-
| ward.
| Mr.. Murrhey stated that his committee
| mad been informed by Mr.. Cowan, of
| jackson, and the ex-Spcaker of this
| House, Mr.. Moore. that it was a good
bill, that they favored it. No petitions
| one way or another had been before the
| committee
Mr.. Aiken called the attention of the
House to the fact that the bill did not
| call for a bar-room He mentioned that
| he had been revenue officer, and was
1 familiar with all the conditions of the
| county.
| Mr.. Britain, of Randolph OPPOSED the
| LII, saying that the county was now on
Il prohibition basis Ex-Speaker Moore
had secured a law accomplishing this
| two years ago.
| Mr. Bount asked if that question had
| been submitted to a vote of the people
| Mr.. Aiken said it had not.
| Mr.. Britain then declared this bill was
| class legislation. There was no reason
why special privileges should be given
| to any class of people.
| Mr.. BlOunt said that when this Legis-
| lature favored the prohibition bill for
| Pennsylvania, certain people in that
county bad taken upon themselves spe-
| cial privileges, entirely disregarding the
| wishes of the people. There was no pro-
| test against the passage of this bill from
| any number of citizens.
| The capitalists who had moved to
| ToxaWay had converted a wilderness into
| a paradise, and they were merely asking
/ for the right to use a little stimulant
| and not to establish barrooms or grog-
| geries The only possible objection to
| the bill TO him was that it had been in :
| troduced by a ex-revenue officer But
| that was not the fault of these hotel
| people.
| Mr.. Morton replied to Mr.. Britain that
| this was not class legislation. and he
| pointed to the fact that the Atlantic
| Hotel at Morehead City was allowed the
right to conduct a bar. The bill would
benefit the State of North Carolina by
1 brf,,