Lexington gazette. [volume] (Lexington, Va.) 1871-1962, 1909-12-15
LEGISLATORS WILL FAvOB
LOCAL OPTION

LEGISLATORS WILL FAvOl
LOCAL OPTION
The Richmond Times Dispatch
last Sunday published preview
the liquor situation with reierenc
to action by the approaching Legis
lature, as follows:
Replies from seventy-three out Q
40 members Of the Legislature ii
response to an inquiry from Tn
Times. Dispatch clearly indicat'
that no legislation OF any sort in TIT
direction of Statewide prohibition
will be enacted by the incoming
General Assembly. A poll OF th'
membership OF the two Houses, Il
which more than half have replied
show that six members stand for 10
cal option 10 each one who favors
prohibition, while il the Democrats
alone are considered. the ratio is
nine to one.
OF the seventeen Senators who
have replied to the request from
The Times. Dispatch for a declara-
ton on this subject, thirteen are for
local option and four for Statewide
prohibition. Between the parties
the Senate stands as follows:
Demonstration local option, IL;
for prohibition, 2
Republicans For local option, q;
for prohibition, 2.
No replies have as yet been re-
ceived from twenty-one Democratic
and two Republican Senator'S.
More than majority of the men,
bers OF the House OF Delegates have
replied. Forty. e'ghtof the fifty-six
who have answered favor local OPP
ton, six are for Statewide prohibit
tion, and two are doubtful. Among
the Democrats in the House, forty,
FIVE are for local option and four for
prohibition. Three Of the Republi
cans answering are for local option,
ard two for prohibition. Thus it
will be- seen that among the Demo
Gratis in the House the proportion
for local option is eleven to one.
Combining the Houses, it will be
seen that seventy.three replies have
been received from the lao mem
bers. Sixty-one favor local option,
ten favor State wide prohibition,
while two are IN doubt. Sixty-seven
members have not yet answered.
Should three Of the forty-four
members of the House who have not
answered favor local option, the
passage Of bill referring State
vide prohibition to the people is i'm
possible. 1t is safe to presume that
majority of the forty.four will
stand for the local option policy.
The voters OF only eight of the
twepty-three Senators who have
not replied are necessary to main
tain the present local option policy.
1t will be noted that the Republi-
cans are nearly equally divided Oh
the question. OF the nine members |
belonging 10 that party who have
replied Eve are for local option and
four for prohibition.
1t is q,ite evident from this rec
Ord that Judge Mann will not be
called upon during the coming ses-
sion to sign a bill submitting the
prohibition question to the people,
since none will be passed, il men,
bers vote as they write.
JUDGE MANNs POSITION
Following is the statement on the
liquor situation made by Judge
Mann, on June 18th. in reply to the
Anti Saloon League:
First. favor the principle Of 10
cal option as the best method of
dealing with the liquor question.
81 cond. Should the Legislature
OF Virginia. without previous in
struc,ion from the people, pass q
bill for State. wide prohibition by
legislative enactment, without sub
mission to the people. l would veto
the bill. y
Third. Should the people elect q
upon that issue, and
should the Legislature so elected
and instructed pass State wide /
prohibitory law, clearly responsive
10 the widespread derand of the d
people expressed at the polls, while y
preferring myself the local option i
method as in my judgment best CAL v
,ulated TO pr, duce permanent re- r
suit, / would sign the bill, as / !,
the right Of the people to
initiate legislation in this and all 1t
,ther matters.
Fourth. II the Legislature pass "
ID bill giving to the people the a
i bit TO vote on the question OF ~ =
,tate- wide prohibition, l would Fl
irn the bill.
Fifth. Should local option elect ~