Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1911-03-03

llOlulllS llllcc SCSSlOlio, DolH Ho"oS
of the North Dakota assembly did som
record breaking work yesterday III tn
matter of clearing the way for adjourn
mcnt tonight. The law grind has bee
strenuous throughout, but was nc
marked by any particular incident out
side of the fight over the congressiona
division.
When the time for the consideration
of the division bill arrived, MIR. De
Nault offered an amendment that sub
sti,utcd the provisions Of the Olsgar'
bill with the following division:
First district-Cavalier. Towner
Ramsey, Walsh, Nelson, Grand Forks
Pcmblla. Steele, Trail, Cass, Ran
som, Sargent and Rchland
Second district-Rolette, Bottineau
McHenry. Pierce, Ransom, Sheridan
Wells, Eddy, Foster, Griggs. stuts
man, Barnes, Kidder, Burleigh, En-
mons. Logan, Mcintosh, LaMour'
and Dickey.
Third district-Diydc, Burke, Rem
vile, Ward, Mountrail, Williams, Me-
kenzic. Mclean, Dunn, Stevenson
Mercer. Oliver, Billings, Stark, Nor,
ton, Hettinger, Bowman, Adams ant
Sioux.
Immediately this amendment was Of
fered, Price of Cass moved to indehi1-
itely postpone, but his motion failed
and the amendment was adopted. Then
Price wanted to postpone the bill, but
in that he also was unsuccessful. with
the vote running at - to 40 to 81 to Al ,
with the supporters of the eastern, cen
trail and western divisions always hold
ing the long end.
This condition prevailed till the am
cndments had finally been adopted and
a motion to suspend the rules was
made. TO this Price, Frame and Sor-
lie made objections, serving notice that
they would take advantage of all par
liamentary modes of procedure to pre-
vent the passage of the measure, which
they declared was obnoxious to them
and to the eastern part of the state.
Later the Honlnes bill, indefinitely
postponed the day previous, was re-
vived. 1t provides for northwestern,
southwestern and eastern division.
In the afternoon when it was learned
that the senate had passed bill on the
division question the house decided to
pass the DISCARD bill as amended, and
a good vote was given it.
One of the big fights of the afternoon
was over Senate Bill No. 3O6. intro
diced by Mr.. Cashel, and providing for
an amendment to the drug permit law
This amendment allows drug stores not
holding a permit to sell liquor for me-
dicnal purposes in emergency cases.
Thompson wanted to defer action TN
til later hour. DISCARD of Nelson
moved indefinite postponement and ar
gued that it was bad bill Frame de-
fended the bill, saying that it was ne
cessary to legalize the dispensing of
liquor on prescriptions, as there were
dozens of places in the state where no
druggists permits were granted, and
liquor could not lawfully
be obtained for proper purposes. Sor-
lie thought the medicinal use of liquor
was largely matter of fiction and quot
ed DIR. Grassick as saying that he had
liquor in only one case in
four years.
Ncstos of Ward made a strong argyll
ment against the bill. contending that
the supply of the medicinal demand was
not the real purpose of the bill, that
the disreputab!e druggists would take
advantage of its provisions to increase
their profits by the sale of liquor; that
certain physicians would make a bust
ness of writing prescriptions for liquor
Hc branded it as vicious measure and
hoped it would be defeated by an over
whelming majority.
DR.. Johns, member from Adams,
grew eloquent in his plea for the pas
sage Of the measure, resented the i'm