The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1909-02-24
CAPITOL CORRESPONDENCE.
Senate Chamber,

1nlSn up lCS WORK aC the elo Ot
the forty days as was expected,
and we will have to return Tues
day night to continue the session,
much to the disappointment of
many of US who have our private
affairs to look after. The respon
sibiiity for the delay is solely
due to the flibuster in the lower
House Notwithstanding the fact
that it is now making the effort
to square itself with the people
by claiming that it had finished
it's work and is ready to adjourn
today, but it does not require the
wisdom Of a Solomon to under
stand the situation.
The constitution requires all
Acts before passage to be read
on three different days in each
house. The House held back the
appropriation and supply bills,
both of which must originate in
the House, until it was physical
impossibility to give these, the
most Important bills, three read
ings in the senate by Saturday.
The Prohibition element by a
determined fight refused to per-
nit the appropriation and supply
bills to be considered before a
vote was secured on the liquor
question, and the anti-Prohibi-
tionists were equally determined
to not permit the Prohibitionists
to have their way, with the re-
suit, a prolonged, and in my opin-
ion. and an unnecessary delay Of
important legislation ensued.
In the senate the Prohibition
leader made several attempts to
force the liquor bills to be ad-
vanced on the calendar. He tried
argument, INDUCED in threats,
flibustered. and in every conceiv-
able manner attempted to BLOCK
legislation to secure the consid
GRAFTON of his pet measures, but
he failed, and had the senate re-
ceived from the House the sup
ply and appropriation bills in
time an adjournment would have
been reached tonight, and thus
have ended a session which must
go down in history as one Of the
most remarkable ever held in
this State.
We come back Tuesday, and
while the House will be marking
time, the senate will have to dis
pose of the liquor question, as
well as making provision for the
financial and fiscal affairs of the
State. Had we adjourned today
the wheels Of the State and coun.
ty governments would have been
blocked and the Governor would
have been forced to call an extra
session at a tremendous expense
to the taxpayers.
The politicians have at last Sc
cured the repeal Of the lien law,
as provided for in section 3059 of
the statutes, but is the lien law
repealed? l say no. The prac-
teal effect will result in liens by
another name will so right on.
Instead of a lien, supplies viii be
obtained under section 5005,
known as the chattel mortgage,
by which a merchants permitted
to sell anything from chunk of
butt meat to al automobile, and
collect from the crop, whereas
under section 3059 he could col
lect only for such articles sold as
were actual supplies. I endeav-
ored to show the senate that the
demand for the repeal of the lien
law did not mean the repeal OF
one section Of the statutes alone,
but it carried with it, the wipiug
off from the statute books all
Acts which permitted a lien or
mortgage to be given upon crop
or anything else which was not
in existence at the time the lien
or mortgage was executed. [ told
the senate this is what my people
wanted, and they would not be
satisfied with anything short of
1t. While I was addressing the
senate, Senator Clifton Of Sum
ter prepared an. amendment en-
bodying my position, and after
much debate we succeeded in
having his amendment adopted,
but the next morning change
came over the spirit Of the dreams
Of the politicians who were loud
est in their clamor for the repeal
cff the lien law. They woke up
to iud by the action of the night
before every vestige OF the lien
law Was repealed, and it might
prove a boomerang as was pOlnt.
ed out by the opponents of re-
peal. so the next morning over
the protests Of those of US who
contended, that if the lien law
was to be repealed, all or none
should go, q reconsideration of
the vote by which the Clifton
amendment was adopted and after
another hard fight, had the
amendment stricken out. leaving
the bill in its original shape, a
sham, the present status remains,
with this difference only. The
liens drawn under section 3059
did not have to be recorded, only
fled at a cost of fifteen cents: the
mortgage drawn under section
3005, which was not repealed has
to be recorded at cost OF about