The Marlboro democrat. [volume] (Bennettsville, S.C.) 1882-1908, 1906-02-16
Bill Passed to a Third Reading
in the House.
HOW Nj EMBERS VOTED
Under the Bill Charleston Can Issue
Liquor Licenses and ths Other
a Counties In the State Would
Have to Accept Prohibl-
ton or Establish Dis
pensarles.

ton or Establish Dis
pensarles.
%The Morgan local option bill, which
abolishes the State dispenSary and
creates county dispensaries or prohi-
bition, according to how each county
votes, except in Charleston, where
they can issue liquor liccnses, estab.
lish dispensaries or adopt prohibition,
passed It's second reading in the
House Of Representatives on Tuesday
Of last week by the sams vote Ii
passed It's first reading week before
last. The bin passed it's third read.
Ing on Wednesday and was sent 10
the Senate. Snould 1t pass that body
and receive the governors approval 1t
will bec ome law at oncs, unleas 10 Is
attacked in the courts, which L; prob
able, as some good lawyers hold shat
the provision In the bill giving Char-
lesion the right to issue licenses
makes the bill unconstitutional.
There were efforts made to kill the
bill, then to amend 1t, but Mr.. Sand
ers who was the Dor manager, kept
the bill intact, and M. Wbaley, to
getber with the other mt mtunOarg OF
the Charleston delegation, kap5 the
Charleston license clause iptact al
though there was h9rcc onilaugnb
on the license clauae. 1t was expoc sed
that there should be % fight ON the
bill going through. Col. ID. o. Her.
bert, OF Orangehurg, took up the
hy6ght against the bill. He stated
plainly that he was opposed to Char.
leston having high license aud then
went on to sympathz, with Charles.
ton wanting something # rent from
the other counties. Col. Hsrberb con.
tended that this was wr0ig IN princi
pie as we'll as unconstitutional. He
protested against the passage OF bhis
bill. 1t has been stated that under
this bill as 1T now stands general pro
fpitfort ossiss sae had. Thss. is % 6poisS
take. If the Prohibltionists believe
this, they are baing dcluded. Tais
bill, this thing Of threads and patches,
will not secure prohibition. Under
this bill counties having dlspensaries
will have to pay 10 per cont to the
State, whereas Charleston, having
high license, will DO exempted from
Herbert said this matter OF county
dispansaries won't do. Il won't do at
all. He insisted that 1t was all wrong.
Every dlspensary In operation to day
under this bill became a. county dis
pensary. Simply changing the name
did no good. He voted fer prohibit
tion because he thought anything
better than the M organ bill. This
Morgan bill would bring lot OF fes.
teripg sores all over the State.
capt. Hamcl said this was not the
experience OF Georgia and North Caro-
lima
Col. Herbert said The bill was abso
lutely without restrictions. The coun.
ty boards could tuy at any old price,
any old liquor, aud pledge the credit
Of the county Without lim,to t,0n. II
this bill be passed bhe State simply
multlplieS by 35 or 40 times the op
portunities for stealing The people
CID not seem to appreciate the seri
ou5ness OF county dispensaries. The
committee bill regulates the purchase
OF Hqpor. In this bill there are no
restrictions OF the county board. The
Dill, he thought, was Dir. city In con-
flC5 with the Constitution. He urged
that the Constitution was written in
the disjuDctive, and nev,r contem.
plated county adoption. There Ia no
local option In the Constitution, and
he did not think there had ever been
any argument against county adop
tiOn.
Capt. Haloe, said the county dis
pensaries were simply che lesser OF!
the evils, and the couGGy dispensarles
would certainly set rid OF the State
dispensary.
Mr.. OTIS pointed out that the credit
of the counties c)uld only be used for
the first purchase, and only the first.
Col Herbert insist d that the coun.
ty dispensaries were unconstitutional,
and could not be legalizsd.
Mr. Hemphlll took q turn at Col
Herbert, aud showed him some or the
wagon ways In the dispensary bill.
Mr.. Hamel said that II the dlspen
sary advlcates had gone with the
ProhlbitioniSts the Tic nse question
would never have been an issue. He
related how the Prohbitionists In the
Constitutional Convention aided the
dispensary advocates, and made 1t
poSSlDlo W iidVo d llC0uSC tySU6lu. lu6
PrOhibltlOniSts in that Convention
fought against licenses, and the dis
pensary advocates forced the license
system into the Constitution, Tnc
ProhibitIonsts were simply trying to
get the best they could AMI that wah
why they favored the Morgan bill.
Mr.. Sandera then 0ok the floor and
argued that there WIS nothing in tho
world IN Col. IIarhert's position. H.;
said there was nothing in the obi &C.
tiOns made, and that Charleston
would have TO pay il3 same proper.
tion TO tho State. The Constitution
was absolutely plain that county dis
pensaries were legal. The Coustitu.
tlon even permits municipal c ntrol,
and 1t plainly provides for county
adoption.
The debate was warm and The
State says Col. Herbert roasted" the
bill severely and made o number oi
thoughtful points " tinsG 1T.
Mr.. Pollock, who waS opposed tt
the hill. wanted TO sneak: but Mr.
Sanders, who had the bill In charge
applied the gag law by calling the
previous question. Mr.. Pollock We y
ted on ills right 10 be heard but friends
the bill did not want to have II