The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1903-02-27

ties not less than one gallon, nor brandy
manufactured from fruit and sold in orig
inaI packages Of not less than five gal
Ions Each county shall levy like tax
for county purposes
Mr. Morton offered a substitute for an
annual tax to be collected. $500 from re-
tail dealers. $500 from wholesale deal
ers, $500 from rectiiers, and $3.50 from
dealers in malt liquors exclusively. One
third to go to the county and two-thirds
to the State
Mr.. Morton explained that this would
double the present State tax and leave
the revenue in the counties the same as
it is now. He claimed the committees
tax was too heavy, and would defeat its
own purpose. The liquor dealers could
not stand it, and only few would re-
main. Amoderate tax would produce the
best results.
The committees proposition was that
one-half of the State tax go to the State
Treasurer. and the other half to the
Treasurer Of the county board of educa-
ton. and all of the county tax to go for
educational purposes.
In response to inquiry. Mr.. Drewry said
that the tax would be prQhibitory in the
small towns
Mr. Morton declared that if such was
the case, he fould register his protest in
the House.
Mr.. King said he was glad to notice
that Mr. Drewry had discovered some
thing that would give some revenue to
the counties But he would ask what
revenue would be derived under this
section by counties having no incorpor-
ated towns
Judge Graham then sent forward his
amendment, to tax liquor dealers 10
cents for~every gallon of liquor, cents
for every gallon of wine, 3 cents for
every gallon Of malt liquor, and cents
for every gallon OF medicated bitters
Every dealer shall report in writing
every month to the sheriff, said report to
be sworn to and registered with the
county records. Anyone making false
return shall be guilty of perjury.
Judge Graham spoke for his amend
ment, claiming that 1t was the most
practical method, and that the tax could
thus be collected most easily. He show
ed how much more other States were
getting from the liquor traffic than
North Carolina.
He said his method would raise $780,
600. Even if only one-half should be
collected, would get $270OOO Last
year there was rectified in North Caro-
lima 2,340 900 gallons.
Judge Graham said he had no sympathy
with the sentiment for a very high
license that would drive out the small
dealers. If the traffic is legalized at all,
every man should be permitted to engage
in it.
Mr.. Hall. of Robson said that every
liquor dealer would have to sell 100 bar
rels of liquor to pay such revenue as
would be realized under the committees
plan.
Governor Doughton said that he had
no prejudice against the liquor deal
ers. But the committee had realized
the great need of the State, and looked
upon liquor as a. luxury, and therefore
fit subject for high taxation.
Last year the total revenue from liquor
was $S5, S7254. In Virginia it was over
$500 900; in Tennessee, over 100000; in
Alabama, over $165,O00.
The committee had not levied this tax
as a prohibitory measure, but only to
raise revenue. 1t would increase the
revenue from liquor by $15O,000.
Judge Graham's plan would be very
difficult to carry out. There would be no
way of determining how much a dealer
sold.
Judge Graham declared that the result
of the committees tax would be to drive
out the smaller dealers and replace
them with the jug-toter and the block
aders. He claimed that the figures of
the gentleman from Robson were e.
roneous.
Mr.. Gattis sent forward an amendment
to put the tax on retail dealers at 500
for each six months. If we wanted to
raise revenue, we ought not to levy
tax that would drive out the liquor deal
ers. We had passed the Watts bill that
permitted liquor to be sold in the towns.
If liquor was to be sold let it be sold.
and let the State get some good out of
it,
The gentlemen of the committee seem
ed to forget that after July LIST there
would be no liquor sold whatever in
some counties Therefore they could not
arrive at any figures. The committee had
trebled the tax on the retail dealers, but
only doubled it on the wholesale dealers.
The question was then put on Mr..
MortOn's amendment, and 1t was lost
Judge Graham withdrew his amend
ment as it did not seem to be satisfac-
tory to the committee.
Mr.. Gattis' amendment to tax the
liquor traffic $500 instead of $780, was
adopted.
Section 60, as amended, was then
adopted.
sectio~ 81, including all dealers in
beverage partaking of the nature of in
toxcating spirits, was adopted, and sec
ton 60, taxing druggists selling liquor
$25, instead of $50, were adopted without
discussion.
Judge Graham offered a section to in
clude clubs.
Mr.. Morton said that only one club
in the State would be effected by that
section, the Cape Fear Club, of Whining
ton He had persuaded the committee
to omit this provision. Besides the bar
room tax, there was a tax of SIS a year
for each member The Cape Fear Club
had been paying the saloon tax and the