The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1906-02-09
friends in this body whose good opin-
ION I value.
value.'
Cart. Hamel's Remarks.

Capt. damel S NeudIAS.
The substance of what Captain
Hamel said is as follows:
$50 much had been said charging
prohibitionists with being in a COM
pact or unholy alliance with the Il
cense people that I wanted to state my
position to be in opposition to license;
that the Morgan bill was not my bill
and I had nothing to do with its prep
aration.
1.-THE prohibitionists had nothing
to do with its being an issue here.
That responsibility was upon the dis
pensary people, who, in the constltu-
tional convention of 1895, cooperated
with the license people to put that op-
ton in.
"Mr. Clayton Of Florence had Off
cred an amendment to the original Sec
ton prepared for the regulation OF
the whiskey question, which amend
ment provided that the licensing OF
the sale of liquor should be prohibited
in the constitution. The prohibition
lists in the convention we're working
with the dispensary people for the
adoption Of this amendment, as 1t
would limit the choice between dispen-
sary and prohibition. But the fate OF
the dispensary was hanging in the
balance at that time and its constltu-
tionality was being tested in the
courts. A member Of the convention
undertook to picture conditions as
they would be under state prohibition
in case the dispensary was declared
unconstitutional and he took about
the same view that the opponents take
now regarding blind tigers overrun-
ming prohibition counties. The de-
bate adjourned and a conference was
held between the dispensary and IL
cense people, and the present section
was the result Of their deliberations.
The dispensary people, and not the
prohibitionists, in unholy alliance
with the license element in the con-
vention are responsible, therefore,
that we have the issue Of license to
consider at all this time. In their
votes here in this legislature the pro-
hibitionists are only seeking to hon
estly choose the lesser IN a choice be-
tween evils
Mr. Dabbs' Rejoinder.
Mr.. Dabbs, by request, made the
following statement:
.'In reply to the 'ranting' inter-
view Of the senior senator, am Hat
tered that my prediction has come
true so much quicker than | antlclpa-'
ted. 7 had full justification in pre-
dieting that he would rant on every
stump for prohibition. If he Will give
termination as long ago as last sum-
mer to whip the boys into line to eth
er save his pet institution or take the
stump or prohibition. If he will give
out such 'ranting' interview and, as
usual with him, so full of inaccuracies
as will be seen by reference to the
facts shown by the aye and nay vote
on the Morgan bill and Mr.. Hamel's
prohibition amendment, and that too
at long range from Washington, what
will he do when he begins his hand
primary on the stumpg
''The history of his previous cam
paigns gives all the answer needed.
I am not uneasy; I know him too well'
even if T am to him unknown. My
position on the dispensary was, as l
thought, we'll known in Sumter coun-
ty. I certainly would not have be-
come a candidate, if I had thought l
would not have the right to give eS-
preston to my convictions on the
floor Of the house, as unmlstakably as
+ knew how, just as for 20 years 1
have from time to time in pubic
print -
Mr.. Sinkler's remarks were accept
ed as they were given. Mr.. Kershaw
briefly commended them and moved
that Mr.. Sinkler be given permission
to print his statement in the journal