Gloucester County Democrat., 1909-04-01
SENATE DEFEATS
LOCAL OPTION
Six Senators Vote for License Election

l.
defeated the Plummer local option bill
Six Seators voted in favor of the
measure, as follows:
Messrs. Ackerman, of Union; Brad
ley, of Camden; Gaunt, of Gloucester;
Gebhardt, of Hunterdon; Minch, of
Cumberland; and Plummer, of Salem
This was one vote less than the ad-
vocates of the measure expected. They
had counted on seven as sure. but
Senator Cornish, of Warren, disap-
pointed them on roll call
The IA Senators voting against the
bill were:
Brown, of Monmouth; Cornish, of
Warren; Fielder, of Hudson; Freling-
huysen, of Somerset; Hand, of Cape
May; Hillery, of Morris; Hinchliffe
of Passaic; Leavitt, of Mercer; Os-
borne, of Essex; Price, of Sussex;
Robbins, of Burlington; Silzer, of
Middlesex; Wakelee, of Bergen; and
Wilson, of Atlantic.
The only discussion of the bill be-
fore roll call was by Messrs. Plum
mer, Gebhardt and Ackerman. But
on roll call every member, except Mes
srs. Frelinghusen, Leavitt, Minch AMI
Price, indulged in more or less lengthy
explanations
The galleries were packed by those
anxious to witness the disposition of
the bill ON the floor of the Senate, bus
there was nothing in any of the
speeches to excite enthusiasm.
After calling the bill up on third
reading, Senator Plummer briefly de-
scribed its principal provisions.
This bill offers the best way to
settle the subject said Senator Plum
mer st is practically referendum
Ithas been discussed in the church,
in the saloon in the workshop, in the
counting room and in practically every
home. And how intensely the people
are interested every Senator here
knows from the large number of let
ters and telegrams they have received
urging them to support the neasure.' Z
Senator Ackerman, of Union, de-
clared that by defeating the bill stthe
people will justly reason that they
have been denied the right of deciding
subject of public Importance which
directly concerns them, and the sur
roundings of their homes He said
he would vote for the bill for the fol-
lowing reasons:
Il. Local option is not prohibition
lit is home rule
2. The sale of intoxicants has al
ways been regulated by the police
powers of the State and there is no
inherent right TO sell the same. 1t
has always been a matter of license
and only At the will of the State.
-. The Legislature is acting within
the limits of the constitution if it re-
n, NH nfo ,.f - +,
be effective only on their approval.
a. The right of the people to vote
on question of this character caLnou
be logically denied.
IS. When the people demand that
right, refusal to grant it cannot be
successfully defended
IS. The State constitution recog-
nizes the principle of the referendum
with respect to debt. If the people
are permitted by local referendum to
decide such questions as bond issues,
franchises, consultations and other
important matters relating to the
power of the purse, why not the sub
ject of the liquor trade?
q. In carrying the liquor question
direct to the people for settlement, it
gives the advocates of high license,
etc, an equal chance before a jury OF
the voters.
"S. If local option is put justly and
fairly before the people, will it not
take the saloon question out of party
politics ?"
Gebhardt, of Hanterd0n:
II shall vote for this bill because it
is a home rule bill, )" said Mr.. Gebhardt
of Hunterdon. 1T puts the question
right up to the people; it gives the
people the right TO decide whether
they will have the saloon or not. I
would like to have some one here, if
there is any one inclined To do Sc, say
why this is not a good principle
find there has been six bills introduced
in the Senate by those acting in be-
half Of the liquor interests proposing
to submit to the people the question
of liquor selling on Sunday. I want
to ask if it is right for the people to
vote on the question of whether or not
liquor Is to be sold onSunday, why it
is not right for the people to say
whether or not it is to be sold six days
of the week? As a Democrat | have
stood on this floor for six years advo-
eating that the people be given the
right to elect all their officers, and
certainly would be Inconsistent if
now stood here and voted to deny
them the right of deciding on this ques
tion of license or no license For my
self, / can say that am against the
saloon. say we have no right to
deny the people the right to settle the
matter for themselves. =
Fielder Replies to Gebhardt.
Raplvino tn Mr. Gahhordt Conafr,.