The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1905-02-17
Senate Vote For the Re-
formatOry.
Continued From Page Three.)

1903 relating to travelling opticians.
Finance
Young. To allow Marshall
of Ashe county to peddle without
license.
Andrews To amend the law Of
1903 relating to the graded school of
| Orange county.
Cowles. TO incorporate the Citi-
zen's Loan and Trust Company OF
North Wilkesboro.
Holbrook. To appoint Justice of
the Peace in Wilkes county
/ Murphy, of Buncombe. To allow
physicians to compound prescriptions.
Murphy. To amend the Constitu-
ton.
Bills Ratified.
To fix the time for holding courts
| in Warren county.
| To provide for payment of one-half
| fees TO witnesses and officers in Cas-
well county when mot true bill' is
found.
TO amend the law of evidence rel
alive to written instruments
To appoint cotton weighers for the
city of Raleigh.
| Resolution in favor of the Nanta-
hala Company.
Passed Final Reading.
Recurring the commissioners OF
| Wilkes county TO levy special tax TO
build bridges across the Yadkin river
1T Roaring river and Hoiman's ford
Mr. Cowles, of Wilkes. desired to
know why Judge Graham had taken
it upon himself 10 introduce q oill Tor
| a county he did not represent.
/ Mr.. Holbrook4 of Wilkes stated that
he was in favor Of the BILL and Mr.
| CoWleS was opposed to it. that the
/ people of Wilkes needed these bridges.
ana Judge Graham had introduced It
| by request. DR. Alexander for the
committee. explained that when the
| bill was before the committee 1t was
stated that a law was passed in 1898
Giving the county commissioners au-
thority to levy a special tax for this
purpose, and they had refused to DO
| so.
Mr.. Cowles in opposing the bin
| stated that Wilkes was already heaV-
| ily burdened with bond debt and the
| people oppressed with taxes. Mr.. Hol-
| b; ook detailed the great need of the
citizens for the two bridges, and
asked members TO vote for the bill
| without amendments.
| Mr.. Cowles offered amendments
which were defeated. TO leave the
question of bridge tax TO vote: 10
| leave the question of building the
bridges to the discretion of the COM
| r,issioners and to strike out the So
| ford and Roaring river respectively,
and authorize commissioners TO Dulld
| bridges at these points.
TO extend the corporate limits of
Rhodhiss i'm Caldwell county.
To amend the omnibus liquor law
| of 1903 by adding a section prescrip-
| ing penalty for its violation.
To amend and revise the charter or
! Franklin in Macon county.
To allow Forsyth county to fund
it's Indebtedness and levy a special
| tax.
TO allow mayor and board of alder
men of Beaufort to issue bonds TO
build a hotel and for other purposes
| To amend the charter of Orreil III
! Robson county.
| TO allow Winston to issue bonds
| for streets.
To create Il stock law territory IN
a portion of Harnett county
/ To incorporate the town of Lewar-
/ rie.
| To amend the charter of BreNard
To regulate the manner, in which
common carriers shall adjust claims
for lost or damaged freight Gmpos-
ing penalty on railroads for falling 20
settle claims within sixty days upo2,
! establishment of consignee's loss, by
| Judgment on Suit.)
Trials OF Capital EeionieS.
The BIN to reduce the number OF
/! challenges of the jury in capital cases
came up on it's second reading.
lhe bill reduces the number OF
challenges for defendant from twenty
three to ten, and increases the num-
Der Of challenges 10 the state from
tour 10 ten, also repeating the law
permitting the defendant TO stand
jurors at the foot of the panel.
Judge Graham explaining the Dill
| -e,.cs1 IN 1nlrr l.
edged except by lawyers making a
lspeclalty OF criminal practice. thai
the present law was entirely too taF-
orable to persons indicted for capltaI
felonles and unfavorable to society
and security of life.
Mr.. Butler advocating the bill said
that when the law allowing % chal-
ienges to defendant, was adopted, they
were not only not allowed to TESTIFY
in their own behalf, but were often
ignorant, and had not the privilege
4 of counsel. Now the state projected
them in every particular and the ole
reason for allowing them so many
challenges had ceased. AS the law
now was, when two men were indicted
together for capital CRIME they nav
i ing forty-eight peremptory challenge
and the right TO stand ten per cent.
to the foot of panel, made 1t simply
4 impossible to convict either one.
Mr.. Laughinghouse, of Pitt. SUP
ported the bill, declaring that the
abuses arising under the present sys-
tenn of giving the murderer every adj
vantage and the State none, was the
cause of most of the lynching. He
sad he knew of two infamous mur-
derers turned loose by jury who had
i to be lynched.
Mr.. Fowler opposed the bill on the
ground that men accused of capital
crime had to overcome prejudice
| against them by people who were no1
really acquainted with the facts ana
it was for that reason that defend
ants had been given and should retain
the right of standing that class of men
/ at the foot of the ranel, or Of per
i emptory challenge. Besides this al
4 most all solicitors grew blood thirsty,
i and with all due respect to the judi
ciary. some Of the judges. At the
state Bar Association it was notable
/ that nearly every one OF the older
and more experienced lawyers there
opposed the enactment OF this blood
thirsty law sought By the bill under
consideration.
! In advocating the bill Mr.. Rober~
i son, of Guilford, said Mr.. Fowler had
81 o a.