Gloucester County Democrat., 1909-04-01

want me, said Mr.. Fielder, adding
that he was convinced that his con-
stituents are opposed to the Phmmer
bill. do not believe in prohibition, .
he continued. Il believe that the mat
ter of drinking is something TO be left
to u man's conscience. Another view
of this question is the immense
amount Of money that is now paid
into the public treasury as result of
license fees. In the State it amounts
to total of $2,700,000; in Jersey City
alone it is $500,000 annually, thereby
materially reducing taxation to the
citizens.
Wilson Thought Bill Incomplete.
Mr.. Wilson, of Atlantic, attacked tie
bill on the ground that it did not pro-
vide complete local option. Leave
the whole subject to the people, not
six-sevenths Of it, he said, intimating
that if the bill provided way for peo-
pie to vote in favor of Sunday selling
he would stand for it.
Hil1eryGiVes His Explanation.
If this local option bill meant the
prohibition of the sale of liquor, not
"a man of us could stand up here and
vote against it, said Mr.. HilIery, Of
Morris. 'But We differ IN belief as to
the effectiveness of the measure. 1
do not believe that prohibition pro-
nibits. Where it has been tried in
other states. prohibition has not been
successful. Local option, which is
next to prohibition, will not prohibit.
1t will mean more violation of the
law. We must have respect for the
law. If we pass laws that make hypo-
critics of the people, it is worse than
the sale Of liquor"
Bradley Believes in Home Rule.
Senator Bradley, of Camden, said
he voted in favor of the bill because
it was a good principle to leave the
matter to the people.
Although Senator Brown, of Mon
mouth, had received a large bunch of
tclesrams earlier in the evening. urg-
Ing him to vote for the bill, he arose
and stated that. so far as lie could de-
termine, a great majority of the peo-
pie OF his county were opposed to
local option. He could not see how
local option would work successfully
when perhaps right alongside of a
dry" municipality would be wet
one.
Mr.. Osborne, of Essex, author of
one of the bills providing for a refer
endum election to 1egalize Sunday
liquor selling, attacked the Plummer
bill as sailing under false colors. 1T
isn't true-blue local option bil1,' he
declared. IF it were, few of us here
would vote against it. If the people
want liquor they will get it. 1t is bet
ter, then, to regulate the traffic.
stand for absolute home rule.
Gaunt Sore, But Votes for Bill.
Senator Gaunt said that he had
suffered much misrepresentation in
connection with the agitation of the
bill. "But notwithstanding the vile
things and the epitilets tnat have been
hurled at me" he said with warmth,
Il will not be swayed from doing my
duty as / see it. There has never been
a question as to how | would vote on
this bill. AS the head of a great or
ganization that is strongly in favor of
local option, l will keep good faith
and vote in favor of the bill"
Senator Hinchliffe, who is a Pater-
son brewer, made caustic attack on
those who have directed the fight for
local option. "The bill is clothed in
hypocrisy and it will die in hypocrisy 2
he said.
Senator Robbins. of Burlington, ad-
mitted that there is growing demand
for local option legislation, but he
could not reconcile himself to support
the Plummer bill, which he thought
weak in many important particulars
Senator Silzer, of Middlesex, insist
ed that to enact local option law
would result in continual agitation of
the saloon question to the extent of
beclouding other and more important
issues in political campaigns.
Senator Wakelee, of Bergen, said
he had found very little real senti-
ment in his county in favor of local
option, and for this reason did not feel
justified in voting for the bill.