Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1912-05-15
OPPOSE LIQUOR BILL
|Chamber Of Commerce Against
Jones-Works Measure.
CHARGE Meeting PACKED
Claim Made That Interests" Sc
cured Unfair Control.
DEBATE STORMY AT TIMES
But Large Majority Carries Resolu-
ton Protesting Against Enact
ment Into Law.
CHARGE Meeting PACKED
DEBATE STORMY AT TIME.

The Chamber of Commerce voted over
whelmingly to oppose the passage of the
Senate bill, known as the Jones-Works
bill. regulating the sale of liquor in the
District Of Columbia, at a meeting last
night. A charge was freely made that
the meeting had been packed by the
LIQUOR interests of the city to fight the
bill. That the opponents of the bill were
out In force was apparent from the open
ing of the discussion.
Three other courses regarding the liquor
bill were submitted to the chamber. but
all were voted down. One was to favor
the passage Of the bill. The only sup
port this motion had came from the man
who made the motion. Charles I. Evans
and the man who seconded it. All the
rest who voted voted No
Another course suggested was to let the
matter rest In the hands of the commit
tee on law and legislation. with the I'M
Outstanding the committee would make
a report to the chamber within the next
ten days. This, too, was defeated by a
large majority.
George Y. Worthington moved that the
entire matter be laid aside and not acted
| upon. In the interests Of harmony in the
chamber. But he received little support
| In this suggestion. The majority Of men,
bers decided that the regulation Of the
liquor traffic in the District was a mat
| ter Of so much importance that the Cham
Der of Commerce could not and should not
| attempt to dodge the issue.
Debate Lasts Two Hours.
For two hours the liquor bill was de-
bated before the chamber. Chaplin Brown,
as chairman of the municipal legislation
committee. brought up the matter. He
| said that subcommittee headed by al
| bert Schulteis was ready with a report
urging the chamber to oppose the bill be-
fore Congress as antagonistic to the best
| interests of the city and unfair to the
property holders and liquor dealers. He
added, however, that 1t had been brought
| to his attention that the committee on
law and legislation Of the chamber. head
ed by A. Leftwich Sinclair, had the bill
under consideration, and he suggested
that, as q matter Of courtesy to Mr.. SIN
clair's committee, that committee be al
lowed to finish its investigation OF the
bill and make it's report Mr.. Sinclair, he
said, had informed him that the commit
tee was not yet ready to report, but
would be ready in the course Of ten days
This Immediately raised the question
as to which committee had jurisdiction
over the liquor bill, the municipal iegis-
lation committee or the law and legis-
lation committee. Charles l. Evans,
member of the committee on municipal
legislation, but an advocate OF the
bill, raised a point of order to the
effect that his committee had no jul
risdiction in the matter, and when this
was overruled he offered minority re-
port from his committee advocating the
enactment of the bill into law. The reso-
luton which accompanied this report was
almost unanimously voted down.
The contention that the law and legis-
lation committee should be permitted to
continue its consideration OF the bill ana
report later was supported by Mr.. Sin
clair, Henry II. Classic and William +.
Shannon Mr.. Classic, as chairman of
the subcommittee Of the law and leg1sia-
ton committee having the bill under
consideration, made a strong plea for
more time.
Pleads for Consideration.
IF this bill is important enough to vote
upon, it is important enough to think
about" declared Mr.. Classic. He said he
believed there were few IL any men pres
ent who really knew the contents Of the
BILL or who would care to stand an ex-
animation upon its provisions. He argued
with a proposition to droy the bill. and
without offering any substitute measure,
and without giving careful reasons, the
chamber would lose its influence with
Congress. He said that there were fea-
lures of the bill which he believed I'M
fair and which should be changed. But
there were others which were good. He
advised the chamber to stand for some
measure. lest in the end prohibition be
thrust upon the District.
Among those who favored immediate
action on the bill were John H. Magruder,
who declared that Mr.. Sinclair's commit
tee ought to have been ready to report
last night: Harry King, P. J. Ryan of the
how mir iraor
president of the Central Labor Union.
They asserted that the provisions of the
bill were known to all the members of
the chamber, that wide publicity had been
given to the hearings before the senate
committee, and that nothing was to be
gained by delay.
John G. Capers. former United States
commissioner of internal revenue. made
an address. in which he declared the
Jones' Works bill unfair both to property
owners and liquor dealers of the city. He
said that 1t had been his observation that
the high-class liquor dealer was as ready
as any other citizen to put out of bust
ness the loW-class liquor dealer who was
bringing discredit on the business.
Opponents in Majority.
When the final vote came on the
Schulties report and resolution it was
adopted without division. the opponents of
jority. President James F. Oyster of the
chamber handled the somewhat stormy
debate with much judgement, it is said,
and preserved order in spite of the fact
that once or twice he had to threaten
some of the members clamoring for rec
ignition with a sergeant-at-arms., The
meeting was by far the largest held by
the chamber this year. the interest in the
liquor bill bringing out most of the men,
bers. Capt. Oyster during the debate said
that he had been informed that there
were in the room a number of men not
members Of the chamber. He cautioned
them against voting on any Of the mo-
tons that came up.
The resolution offered by Mr.. Schulteis
and finally adopted was as follows:
Whereas Senate bill No. 5461, entitled
An act to regulate the traffic in intoxi-
eating liquors In the District Of Columbia,
having come before us for consideration,
therefore be 1t
Resolved, That the Chamber of Com
merce of the city Of Washington, after
full discussion and careful consideration
of said bill. earnestly recommends that 1t
be not enacted into law. being of the
opinion that it is against the. interests Of
the citizens Of the District of Columbia.
4 A number of members of the chamber.
after close of the meeting. spoke with
much feeling regarding the action taken