Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1912-06-25

/
(speaking of Jones) was a strong ad-
| vocate Of the dispensary and Is now
local optionist." Let's see: Jones Vot-
ed for prohibition-see house journal,
| 1891, page 203-and again, same house
| journal, page 227. Jones voted for
county prohibition-see house journal,
1891, page SIS; voted for the Roper
and Childs bill, which provided for
statewide prohibition-see house jour
nal, 1892, pages 225, 312, 314 and S24.
Jones voted against the dispensary
law when it was first and originally
passed. The house had passed what
was known as the Roper and Childs
bill-state-wide prohibition-for which
Jones had voted all the way through,
and it was sent to the senate. 1t was
amended in the senate and the dispen-
sary law was sent back to the house
as the amendment to the Roper and
Childs bill. Jones voted against the
amendment, which was the dispensary
law-see house journal. 1892, page 573.
When did Jones turn from being pro-
hibitionist, as proved by every one OF
his votes. and as proved by his vote
against the original dispensary law,
to a dispensary man? Was 1t when he
wanted to be promoted to associate
Justice of the supreme court, and when
the dispensary people had absolute
control Of the government and leg1sla-
ture. which was to elect the associate
Justice? Go a step further: When
the fight was being made In the leg1s-
lature to keep a dispensary from be-
ing forced into Marlboro county Jones
voted to force the dispensary in Marl-
boro, without allowing the people to
vote as to whether they wanted 1t or
not, thus depriving them Of local SELF
government-see house journal, 1893,
page 465. He also voted against local
option and to force the dispensary In
dry counties-see house journal, 1893.
pages 467 and 46S. The Importance OF
this vote Is so great, In view or MS
recent political somersaults. that
beg leave to quote 1t here in full-see
house journal, 1893. page 467: ME-.
Buist moved to amend by making the
following section Al: (the house then
having under consideration the dispen-
sary law): mo part Of this act shall
apply to any town in this state that
prohibits the sale of liquor under
charter. Also. all counties in which
the sale of liquor is prohibited by
statutory law: Provided, That at a
general election two-thirds of the reg
istered voters Of said counties express
by ballot a desire for the establish
ment of a dispensary therein, then, In
that event, a dispensary may be es-
tablished within the limits of some
town or city within that county" Mr..
Nettles moved to lay the amendment
on the table. The yeas and nays were
requested, and the first man recorded
as voting in the affirmative and
against this amendment, which pro-
hibited the putting of dispensaries In
dry towns and dry counties, and which
gave to the people of those towns and
counties the privilege Of local option
is Ira B. Jones, speaker. When did ne
become a local optionist-after he
could not force liquor on dry counties.
Having voted for statewide prohibi-
tion all the way through, he then
Topped over to the dispensary, and
then voted every crack to force the
dispensary into prohibition territory,
which had always been socalled dry
counties" When he Topped from pro-
hibition he ouble-somersaulted and
out dispensaried the dispensary's dad
DIV, as Is shown here by his record.
Now, did Mr. Thurmond. when he
wrote this letter, know Jones record
or did he attempt to deceive? For
Jones certainly was not "a strong ad-
vocate Of the dispensary," and he GER
tainly was not a local optionist when
he had a right to vote and give local
option to the people, but he voted to
deprive them Of 1t.
When did his conversion OF local
option take place? Since he entered
the race for governor. Jones may
have been converted about the time
that the house took out of his hands
the appointment Of certain commit
tee. which had always been appointed
by the speaker, and at the time when
he got very angry and resigned from
the speakers chair-see house jour-
nal 1894, page 552-showing a COM
plete loss Of control of himself, just
as he did when he got mad because
he could not be governor and chle1
Justice both, and resigned the high
and honorable position Of chief justice
(Which is for a term Of ten years.
at salary of $4,000 per year, to run
for governor, (Which is only for
term of two years, at a salary OF
$4,000 per annum.)
But, he says he Is a great morallst'
yet, he voted to have a divorce law
in South Carolina-see house journal,
1892, page 235-thus endeavoring to
| break down the great moral bulwark
which South Carolina boasts so much
of. l suppose he has climbed back
| on the moral pinnacle, since ne couid
not make the divorce law. while he
was practising at Lancaster, in order
that he might make some handsome
fees in the divorce business.
When we were struggling to relieve
ourselves from the exorbitant rate OF
| interest which was being charged In
| this state, and when the money lend
ers were robbing the people with
usury, Jones was in the speakers s
chair, as speaker of the house of rep
resentatives, and when Mr.. Magill OF
Greenwood moved to reconsider the
votes whereby the house had indefin-
itely postponed the bill to reduce the
legal rate of interest and to prevent
usury, a motion was made to lay the
motion of Mr.. Magill on the table:
Ira B. Jones voted to lay Mr. Magilfs
| col fhlS kill the