Gloucester County Democrat. (Woodbury, N.J.) 1878-1932, 1906-03-08

Much Time Given TO Coneider-
alton of Liquor Bills.
colby WANTS AN ISyEsTIGATIoS
Arguments For and Against His Res
olution to Probe Insurance Compa-
niles Heard--cIash In Assembly over
Especial CORRESPONDENCE. /

Trolley Franchise Measure
Especial Correspondence.
q Trenton March s. This week in the
! legislature was Chiefly remarkable for
u the great amount Of time given BY the
legislators to the consideration of leg-
} isiation for the regulation Of the liquor
business III New Jersey. One of the
most important disposed Of during the
week was the local option bill, which
was killed. Nearly half day was de-
voted to a hearing on the other anti
liquor bills Tuesday. 4 great part of
], yesterday was taken up with hearing
on Senator Colby's resolution for the
investigation of insurance companies,
state banks and trust companies.
S. The first clash of the session be-
tween the Colby forces and the adj
I. ministration regulars of the Republic
an party took place Monday evening
!, when Assemblyman Martin Of Essex.
the Colby leader in the lower branch,
moved to relieve the committee on cor
I porations Of further consideration of
his bill to repeal the law prohibiting
the granting of trolley franchises in
i streets within a hundred feet of a
rival line.
j Assemblyman Buck of Cumberland
defended his committee by explaining
that the bill had not been reported be-
cause it was defective. The Republic
an leader, Mr. Perkins. and others also
defended the committees action in not
reporting the bill
Assemblymen Scovel and Barber ac-
cused MIR. Martin of endeayoring to
embarrass the administration and of
introducing new ideas into politics. Mr..
Martin warmly defended his action
and a lively interchange of personali-
ties followed RidicuIe flew thick and
fast Laughter and applause greeted
/ the speakers. The motion to relieve the
committee was lost.
The intention of the Colby forces to
insist on action on the foo on their
measures was shown Monday night
when Mr.. Martin followed the first
debate by motion to relieve the COM
mittee on corporations of further cou-
sideration of bill No. II repeating the
act of April S, 1903, and called the
promoters liability act" Mr. Mar
/ rin,s bill proposes an extension of the
/ time from four to six years in which
suit may be brought against a person
or corporation for entering into Sc
cret compact for profit with another
person or corporation.
Colby Men Defeated.
i Mr.. Martins motion to relieve the
/ committee of this bin brought on an.
other warm debate between the adj
i ministration and the reform leaders
and another defeat for the Colby men.
/ Order came out of chaos when
ISpeaker Robbins took the floor and
accused Mr.. Martin Of not being
square with his fellow legislators
by calling for bills from committees
which were defective in all points.
/ Mr.. Martin said he had asked the cor
poration committee to amend his bills
and report them, but they were shelly
ed. He accused the committee of att
tempting to hold up legislation de
manded by the people.
| BY 40 to ID the local option bill was
lost in the house after lengthy de-
bate lasting until after midnight Tues
day morning.
Mr. Morgan offered as an amend
ment to the local option bill house bill
232, which provides that when 30 per
cent of the legal voters Of a municipal
lily shall so petition there shall be sub
United to popular vote the question of
fixing liquor license fees at an amount
named in the petition. Mr.. Morgan
said it merely re-enacted repealed
section Of the Werts act Of 1890. The
substitute was lost, to 49,
Mr.. Martin, In speaking for the sub
stitute, referred to the defeat of the.
Republican party in 1888, which was
due to the adoption Of the local option
bill.
The measure then came up on third
lreading, and Mr. Buck, representing
Mr.. Miller, the introducer of the bill,
who was absent because of the death
lof his wife, spoke for fifteen minutes
on the bill, pointing out the advantages
Of local option.
/ Mr. Marelli said that the wrong meth
cd had been chosen to bring about the
llaw desired Prohibition wherever
tried has never regulated the liquor
i traffic, be said Mr. Berg said he was
not in favor of the bill because it
would not crrtail the sale of liquor.
Local option would not solve this