The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1904-08-09

'ion. was intended. with its substi-
tutc. TO accomplish the same object
that was desired in the original Brice
Bill. This Bill and it's substitutes
vas known as House Bill I6S. and
passed its second reading on Jan I6.
1902. by an aye and nay vote OF 7,3 to
,>,. several Of the members OF the
house and. in fact. one-third of them
not understanding at the time. the
real object OF the Bill. as was clearly
shown by the succeeding votes on the
same bill. The bill was afterwards
recommitted on an aye and nay vote
and was finally indefinitely postponed
on February IS, 1902. l voted
against this bill all the way through
and demanded the roll call and put
the 'clincher' on the vote on its in
definite postponement I believed
at that time, as did many others,
and still believe that the bill was a di-
rect attack for the ultimate defeat Of
the dispensary law and the influences
back of this bill clearly bear me out
in this belief The bill finds its chief
supporters not altogether among the
prohibitionists or those who want
prohibition just for the purpose of
suppressing the liquor selling, but
it seems that its most ardent advo-
Gates are those who are violently op-
posed to the dispensary law and will
espouse any bill; or scheme to bring
about it's downfall. 1t is my be-
lief that if this original bill should
become law, that it would be only
a short time before the dispensaries
in certain localities would be voted
out and this would be done not be-
cause of the fact that the people of
these localities desired prohibition or
are prohibitionists. but on account of
opposition to the dispensary law.
recognize the fact, as we'll as do the
great majority Of the people, that the
dispensary is not perfect in all Of
its details nor is it in a.. places prop
erly enforced and observed accord
ing to the strict letter of the law, and
I am therefore forced to the conclu-
sion that the faults in the dispensary
law are not SO much in the law itself.
as it is in its enforcement.
aside from what I have said in
regard to this Brice Bill. I do not
see why its supporters should not. in
a great measure, be satisfied with
what they have already accomplished.
They have the right now to vote out
the dispensaries and under the pres
ent law. the only penalty imposed
is that Of losing their share in the
surplus school funds; for the one
half mill tax imposed is to be used
and expended under and by direction
Of the governor, and if it is not all
used for the purpose Of enforcing the
law in such counties, the balance is
returned to that county and is there
used for ordinary county purposes.
Should any county object to paying
ior the enforcement of the law within
its own borders? Have they any right
to expect that the other portions of
the state shall be taxed for the main
tenance of a constabulary in these
prohibition CD counties? Shall the
illicit sale of liquor be allowed in
some counties and its attempted en-
fOrcement Of the law be done by a
tax on other portions of the state?
1t certainly would be tax on these
counties on account of the fact that
a portion of their profits would be
used in this manner. I am in favor
of the dispensary law as the best So
luton OF the liquor question and have
been ever since its first enactment
and long before I entered politics,
and | am therefore opposed to any
idea or bill which in my judgment
seeks to abolish it and cause a re-
turn to former conditions or worse
-, Ill etata There are tnanE STRONG