Orange County observer. [volume] (Hillsborough, N.C.) 1880-1918, 1905-02-02
COMPROMISE Considerable debate fol-

In the House petition was filed
from $500 members of the Baptist AS
SOclatiOn and 500 voters, that the
Watts law remain as at, present, OF If
changed; be made more stringent.
Bills were introduced to allow Spencer
TO issue bonds for schools and electric
lights and to establish graded schools:
10 amend the law regarding deeds of
trust; to incorporate Tuckaseegee
hallway, to amend the law so that the
executor of an estate shall not be ex-
ecutor OF the first testator. The House
took up the special order, namely. the
antl-jug law of 1903, the bill being to
repeal 1t, except as to Cleveland. Ca
Darrus, Castor and Mitchell. Mr.. Me-
Nlnch offered amendments Incorporate
ing the State anti-jug law into the
Watts law, section 2, saying he had
no desire and the friends of temper:
ance had no desire to take advantage
OF accidental law, but by the passing
OF the bill with his amendment. this
accidental. law would, in effect be: re.
pealed, and at the same time a straight
antl-jug law be enacted Mr.. David.
OF Haywood, chairman of the commit
teemen of liquor traffic moved that
the bill be referred to that committee.
"A ueUdCe IOllOWeQ.
The House took up the special or
der, this being the bill to repeal the
anti-jug law of 1903, except as to Cleve-
land. Cabarrus, Mitchell and CASTOR
| counties. McNinch offered an amend
ment incorporating an anti-jug law for
the State into section 2 of the Watts
law, saying he had no desire and the
friends of temperance had none to
of1O of
but that by passing the bill of his
amendment, this accidental law would
| IN erect be repealed at the same time
q State anti-jug law would be enacted.
Davis, of Haywood, chairman of the
| committee on liquor traffic, said that
as the amendment injected entirely new
| matter, which was not considered by
the committee when it made it's origi-
1 nal report, he moved that the bill be
rc-referred. Murphy; of Rowan, object
ed to this re-commitment, saying he
| thought members ought to meet the is
sue squarely and be willing to say
whether they desired to take advantage
OF an accidental law or not Wineborne
said he introduced bill for repeal, ex-
cept. as to the counties above referred
| to, which are named in the acts of
1908, and that the bill was so worded
that any county desiring it could be
/ placed within the anti-jug law terrific
ry. He added that it. was. we'll known
fact that the anti-jug law bill, apply
ing to whole State was defeated in
1903, and hence that it was nothing but
proper to repeal any law which had
been enacted by mistake. Graham, of
I Granville, favored re-cOmmltment OF
the bill, as did Stewart, Of Harnett,
and Alexander, of Mecklenburg. KOOnce
1 uf Onslow, opposed postpOnement, say
ing it was generally understood during
the campaign, and he had so stated to
his constituents, that the law would
he repealed because it was tainted with
error, if not with fraud. He had the
authority Of the distinguished chair
man of the, Democratic committee for
the assurance that as a matter Of course
the law would be repealed. Warren, OF
Jones, said the law was not made an
issue in the campaign in his section
because it was universally considered
that as matter of course it would be
repealed This is the only manly course
to pursue, and then, if it is desired
another bill giving an anti-jug law te
the entire State could be introduced
and stand on it's merits. Men high IL
Iauthority in North Carolina had led tn
people to believe this law will b
promptly repealed SO far as it relatet
to territory not included in the bill. HI
+ opposed any postponement Murphy, o
, Rowan, said he had no objections to al
) anti-jug law of those counties who's
! members desired it, but was not in ia
! vor of postponing action in repealin
r the law covering the whole State. TIL
}. people expected to see the law re
, pealed promptly, and yet here it wa
. the goth day of the session, and tn
2 bill to repeal had been held back an
n now it was proposed to still furthe
n / postpone it. Mitchell, of BERTHE, favore
+ the repeal without any further post
q ponement saying it was well-know
9 how he stood on the temperance ques
r ton and how the liquor influence trie
= to defeat him in the last campaign, bl
;. he could not rest contented mome1
without voting the repeal Of the pre-
II ent law, passed inadvertently. He b'
:. lieved an anti-jug law could be passe
= By this Legislature to cover this who
~ State, but whether that was so or no
. it would be objectionable and III
- manly to allow the law as at prese.
y construed by the Supreme Court to r.
;. main On the statutes. Robertson sa
~ he would vote for an anti-jug law II