The Mount Holly news. [volume] (Mount Holly, Burlington Co., N.J.) 1891-1942, 1909-03-30
Tha r.oco1 nn+ior Pin

The Local Option Bill.
In the Senate, last evening, the local
, option bill was defeated. Among those
who voted against it was Senator Samuel
J K. Robbins, of this county. In explana-
ton of his vote Senator Robbins made the
following remarks:
II desire to state my reasons for voting
as I do on this bill, In order that they
may be neither misunderstood nor mis-
represented. It is possible that local OPP
ton is the best solution of the excise
question. If 80, the sooner we pass such
law the better, provided its enactment
is demanded by such a preponderance of
public sentiment throughout the state as
will insure its retention upon the statute
books until its results can be thoroughly
tested.
"While there appears to be a growing
demand for such legislation in certain
localities, the Indications to my mind, are
that 1t is not yet sufficiently strong to
make such a law either possible, desirable
or forcible The demand that the legal
voters of each municipality shall be per
mitted to settle for themselves by popular
vote the question of license or no license
has specious sound and appeals strong
ly to those who are prejudiced against the
sale of intoxicants and view the situation
from that standpoint alone.
''To those who take broader view of
the question the possibilities involved in
such proposition must necessarily excite
alarm and apprehension. Already there
is an urgent demand from the populous
centres for a relaxation of the laws with
respect to Sunday selling. A number of
bills have been introduced at this session
| to submit the question of Sunday selling
to popular vote. If 1t is wise to submit
the question of sale or no sale to popular
vote, under what principle of justice can
the people be denied the right to pass
upon the whole question and determine as
well when sales shall be made
81 am aware that large number of
reputable and well meaning citizens,
whose opinions l respect, (few of whom,
however, have seen this bill or under
stand its provisions,) are urging its pas
sage and insisting that the people shall
have the right to determine the question
4 for themselves. If their contention Is
highland l do not say it is not-whY
should they ask for the limited powers
conferred by the bill9 Should these be
granted how can the Legislature refuse
to submit the whole question to popular
vote, if the demand is made, as 1t will be Z
For myself, l am opposed to anything
that threatens to destroy the sanctity of
the American Sabbath in any portion of
the state. The bill under consideration,
while it is an improvement upon its pre-
decessors, presents some anomalous
features that may be justly criticized as
savoring of unfairness While it pur-
ports to be a measure providing for a
popular vote by municipalities upon the
question of license or no license, it pro-
poses to submit that question in most
offensive and unfair fern. BY its pro-
visions the only question submitted will,
in all cases, be whether the municipality
in which an election is held under this act
shall be anti-saloon territory. If a |
majority vote in the affirmative (and l
submit that in many municipalities 1t
would be difficult to get a negative on
such question: not only saloons but all
other places where intoxicating liquors
are now sold, except drug stores, breweries
and distilleries, will be compelled to stop
selling when their licenses expire. In
large number of municipalities there are
no saloons at all, but reputable hotels only
at which the travelling public are &C.
commodated. In such municipalities this
will be an unfair way of stating the ques-
ton, and will present false issue. This
bill further provides in section 5, this
act shall not in any manner affect the
right of any manufacturer of intoxicating
liquors from the raw material to sell, de-
liver and furnish his product in wholesale
quantities to bona f1de retail dealers
traff1cking in intoxicating liquors outside
of the limits of such municipality, or in
wholesale quantities to any party or
parties outside of the limits of said mum
icipalitY.
"How can such an exemption be justi-
| fed except upon the grounds of eXpe-
diency7
''Is this sop to the manufacturer, or
did the trainers of this bill fear to violate
that fundamental principle of justice
which found expression in the declaration
of our constitution, that private property
shall not be taken for public use without
| Just compensation
IF sop, it is contemplate. If done
to avoid the conspicuous injustice that
would result to the manufacturer, it seems
pertinent to inquire whether the deprecia-
ton in property values and practicalcon-
| fiscating to which many reputable dealers
will be subjected if this law is enacted,
will be any less unjust because less con-
spicuous Is the manufacturer less
harmful than the dealer who does not
manufacture Are the rights of the for
mer more sacredf Can the sale of intoxi-
cants be successfully prevented in NUM-
clpalltles where their manufacture Is per-
mitted2
''There are other manifestations of the
unfairness which pervades this bill which
l shall not mention now. With all its
faults, did I believe that its enactment
would produce a substantial part of the
beneficial results that its supporters claim,
would be strongly inclined to give it
my support, but I am not convinced of
| this, or that the time Is ripe for such leg
islation; nor am convinced that nation
al regulation will not produce the best
results In dealing with the liquor ques-
ton. For these reasons, and because
believe that if the same zeal that has
been exerted in urging the passage Of this
law were exerted in enforcing the laws
now upon our statute books and in up
holding and encouraging those who are
responsible for their enactment aud en-
forcement, much better results would be
accomplished than are possible under this