The Morris County chronicle. [volume] (Morristown, N.J.) 1877-1915, 1908-03-24
LOCAL OPTION
DEFEATED
The Assembly BY a Vote Of A
to rs Refuses to be Intim-
dated by Threats.
MR.. BUXTON PRESENTS VIEWS

on last Tuesday after a prolonged
and exciting debate. Many other meas
ures of importance were considered,
and number of public hearings were
given, but the greatest interest cen
tered around the Crosby bill.
The local option bill was reported in
the house yesterday, and the measure
was taken for final passage. 1t was
defeated by vote of A to 10. The
principal amendment offered by the
committee eliminated any objection to
the use of fermented wine at COM
munion services in churches. This
amendment was adopted by 40 to II
votes. An amendment was presented
by Assemblyman Fake providing that
the local option bill should take effect
when approved by majority of voters
of the state at general election and
was lost after spirited debate by a
vote of 21 to %. Assemblyman Hines
submitted an amendment providing
that the vote for or against local option
should not be taken within sixty days
of any special, primary or general
election. This amendment was also
lost by vote of .26 to 80. Another
amendment by Assemblyman Hines
eliminated the most Objectionable fea-
ture of the bill to the opponents of To-
cal option-viz, that making the pro-
posed law apply to the entire mu-
nicipality. This was strongly advo-
Gated by Assemblyman Martin, mouse
leader on the Republican side, and was
lost by IA to 40. The amendment pre-
scented by Assemblyman Sullivan was
also lost providing for country local
option, and the amendment that the
bill shall not apply to counties was de-
feated.
Mr.. Buxton spoke as follows; =
If any one had reason to vote against
the local option bill for personal rea-
SOILS, Assemblyman Buxton was that
individual. Yet when it came up in
the Assembly he made a brief speech
defining his reasons, which were as
follows:
shall only occupy a few minutes in
stating my position regarding the bill
before the House.
There are several reasons to my mind
why this bill should be defeated.
= In the first place the bill is neither
good legislation nor an honest bill.
In the second place the members of
this House have been the recipients
of such threatening and disgraceful
letters and communications that alone
might very properly defeat the meas,
ure.
1t does seem an outrage that the
members of this body must be sub
Jected to such threats as certain let
ters, which are on the floor of this
House, contain. | trust that some
of those letters will be read.
We have all read good deal about
the dictation and bossism of what we
might call "the old regime" And we
all express disapprovaL that legislators
could be influenced by outside sources.
Mr.. Speaker challenge anyone to
show any action of any boss or leader,
either in the present day or in the past,
that can compare in violence and yelled
threats with certain letters that GER
tain clergymen have seen fit to send
into this body. But | think that we
should be broad enough in spite of all
this abuse to remember our duty to
our constituents and our oath of Of
flee and vote on this measure and all
measures as our conscience dictates.
There is probably no one on the floor
of this House who had to stand more
abuse and unfair treatment at the
hands of the paid lobbyist of the Anti
Saloon League than myself, but | shall
not allow personal feelings to influence
me in the matter of my vote on this
measures.
The persons behind the bill last year,
plead in our public hearings and with
the members to allow the ward clause
to remain in the bill, stating "that
the smallest political division should
be able to state it's choice and then
abide by such decision thereafter
Now this bill allows the small divis-
ion to express it's preference at the
polls under this law, and states that
the result of that election shall hold
good for two years, and then goes on
to state that if a larger division in
which the smaller division ScOntained
shall hold similar election and the
vote OF the larger division shall be con-
trary to the vote of the smaller divis-
Ion thereafter the smaller division
must, bow to the decision of the larger
division.
Mr.. Speaker is not my opin-
ion of Local Option.
Then this bill states that if district
is dry, it shall stay dry, but if wet
then an election can be held under
this act to endeavOr TO have the wet
district go dry. What If the residents
of the dry districts want to go wet
Should not they have a right under
Local Option to express their views
Is this fair legislation? think not.
The 9th section is to my mind un-
constitutional but leaving that ques-
ti0n out entirely / believe that a per-
son making charge against another
should be compelled TO prove the
charge. This section leads me TO be-
lieve that the intention is that per-
son charged with any infraction of
this act, must prove himself innocent:
Our constitution plainly states that a
person is innocent until he is proved
guilty.
Mr.. Speaker DO not think that this
bill is good bill, nor do believe its
enactment would be good legislation.
Ishall therefore vote against the bill.
In the discussion Mr.. Baker said he
h0npd that whatever might haDDen to