The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1912-02-22

Cox has not concluded his speech and
he is 70 be followed by Walter Tansill
Oliver and Judge Martin Williams. with
perhaps others, Several amendments
arc to lie considered and acted upon,
nnd 1t is hardly possible that final
ballot can be taken before the chair
Is vacated under the rule, at 9 o'clock
Members Not Pledged.
Another argument which had It's
weight is tina; the Jorda mill does not
comply with tho petitions sent In by
the public. These papers call for
vote upon the petition of 90 per cent
OF the qualified voters, while the bill
would make II only 20 per cent OF the
people who voted in the state election
IN ac9, when only 10000 citizents went
- the polls tho result being fore
gone conclusion. Therefore. the bin
carries un initiative OF only about 10
per cent, instead of - per cent OF the
voters OF the state. 1t is argued from
this that The pledges of members,
which Were based upon the same prop
os'ion OF 70 per cent of the ontirc
vote, do not bind them to vote for the
hill.
Debate was begun yesterday by S. II.
Love, of Luuenburg. who. on mo
tion of Captain John y. Curtis was
given THE entire ioor Of the House"
lie mentioned the way in which prohi-
billion was accomplished in other
method of popular vote to the Georgia
way of having the esislature pass
prohibition bill. II was he thought
more disnhcd.
Inquiries for People.
The great sovereign people, he in
sisted. want to vote ON this bill Cap
tain curtis asked him Mhcre these peu-
PIE We're ana he replied that they are
ciamorins Tor chance for expression
Captain Curtis was the next speaker
The prohibition agitation. lie said. was
MI politics lie did not See Why the
people in dry places should vote TO
regulate those in Yves: communities
IT would cost $ic,o"O. perhaps, TO
hold the election, ana should the people
Vote against state prohibition. this
would have been wasted. In that cleo
iion there would vote Democrats, re
I'uhlicans. negroes and muswumps. |
Should the State 20 dry il would lose
100000 revenue. ana its finances would
i" in had condition.
Makes State Question.
G, ". Throckmorton. of Henrico,
contended that the people have an in |
lcrent right TO vote upon this oues !
tion, IT localities collected all tho
liquor license and paid All the criminal,
expenses. he could see why localities =,
only should settle it, but inas.nuch as
tile license goes into The treasury of
the state, aud that the criminal costs
Hrc paid, all the people should pass
ON the question.
one OF the White amendments abro !
Eates the other. he rontendcd. The |
next Legislature could III any case !
ratify or repeal tho Jortan bill Now,
liquor licenses cannot lie secured UNI |
less the applicant complies with the |
provisions of the law In many ways III.
this bill passes, II Will he simply say !
"a No I'M ,,-l
sell Ii they can set minority OF the
people TO say so.
Mr.. White. he thought, was brought
ny In the objective case. He must have
been the champion critics III his liter
sry society. He is so constituted that
lis mind looks for flaws. wonder
how many people who think his argu
ment unanswerable will vote for tho
Bill with his amendment in it,
Prohibition Immoral.
John rutherford. OF Goocnland |
said he came to the Legislature unin- /
ttructed, and reserved the right 10 !,
exercise his own Judgment. In that |
o%eraisc he would vote against this |
bill. Ii was n fundamental principle, |
in his opinion that people should be
permitted 10 use liquors in modara ton, |
lic did not believe, as moral PROPOSE
ton. that prohibition was right.
Besides the bill was not altogether |
'hl1' as, NH'le II appears 10 require ~
per cent. of the qualified voters as |
petitioners. tho number is really much |
smaller. Again, 1t would use country |
people 70 interfere with what city |
people desired. II would use them to
vote others out Of the privilege of |
home rule and individual liberty
Prohibition cannot prohibit, he con-
;inued since the Supreme Court has
Just said that common carriers may
not refuse TO transport liquor from
one state TO another People would |
keep on using liquo, and the STATIC
would get no taxes.
Intempcrnte Legislation.
The Jordan bill, said Mr. Ruthcr-
foord is intemperancc in legislation
It would establish precedent of
referendum. which would be unwisc.
Then 4. %olld."hrinc women ana
preachers into politics.
re concluded by saying it was un-
fortunate that members had been
pledged, and not permitted to exercise
their own Judgment. For his part,
he proposed to vote his convictions
whether nc ever got back or not
II takes Sc IN criminal costs for 81
In liquor licenses said a. Il. Robert
son. OF Lee. Republican member He
would stop this leakage. In four coun-
ties OF his section $4,000, 900 was about
10 BE spent on public roads. none of
this money coming from liquor license.
Those now lighting the Jordan bill
once fought local option AS TO the
constitutional argument, nc felt that
a-z==--s--------.-----,--