The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1914-01-22
BEAT OLIVER BILL;
ADVANCE THEIR ACT
Advocates of Enabling Meas
ure Have Full Sway in
House and Order to Engross-
ment.
Will Pass Today After Mum.
Der Of Speeches and be
Sent to Senate for Prompt
Action in That Body. Final
:
Passage Expected.

Passage Expected.
After a windy session yesterday, the
house of delegates completed the
iecond reading of the enabling act and
ordered its engrossment Today VIII
mark the final reading and passage of
the measure giving the people of Viz
ginia the right to express their senti-
ments At the polls as 10 whether or not
state wide prohibition should prevail.
The adoption of amendments. ciar-
flying the measure and the defeat OF q
substitute BILL putting II up 10 the
legislature to vote on Statewide pro-
hibition, were the features of the day,
argument The galleries were packed
to capacity and applause frequently
broke from both the floor and the
galleries when some member made a
strong point in favor of the enabling
oct.
Oliver for Amendments.
Mr. Oliver. of Fairfax. the game
cock OF the opponents Of the enabling
act. WAS the first to take the floor.
He again referred 10 the amendments
offered to the bill and declared the
frtenuS Of f1r- rueasure sirutffd gree
TO the amendmenS, making 1t necessary
for the petition To be signed by quail
ned voters, OF his second amendment,
inserting the words on the ballot. For
Local Option" in lieu Of Against
State wide Prohibition" he said II
was purely question OF whether the
State would go dry or have local option
and he hoped the house would give his
amendments "prayerfuf' considera-
ton.
Mr. Hornar, of Southampton, took
exception tn Mr., divers second
Ix~-n 5ye% fe.x f~1 1oy xxyaa q.
leading to have thu words for local
option op the ballot as 1t was purely
an issue as 10 whether Statewide pro-
hihition should prevail or not. Mr.
Leedy Of Page, agreed with Mr..
Horner. saying the issue was too clear
cut and drawn between Statewide
prohibition and local option.
The question Was then put and Mr.
divers amendments were voted down
almost by reclamation ard the result
was n decisive yIeg0ry for the adso-
Gates of the enabling act.
Offers His Substitute
Mr. Oliver then introduced his Sub
etitute bill. providing for the pro-
hihition Of the sale and manufacture
OF liquors In the State Of Virginia. the
law 10 take effect July l, 1914. This
bill was the result of what MIR. Oliver
called. calling the bluff Of the house OF
delegates.
In speaking OF his bill. the gentle
man from Fairfax said his friend from
Giles, speaking of Judge Martin Will
1iams, patron of the enabling act, had
said he was not sincere. lie III turn
charged with insincerity the people
who had been going up and down the
Etate preaching prohibition. and who
did not vote for his substitute bill. III
II is going 10 be so delightful and
make such a heaven of Virginia, why
put IT, off, Why not vote on it right
here In the house and IT the bill passes
put 1t into effect july is,e
He declared that the enabling act
was one of the most unconstitutional
bills ever presented before the gem
erai assembly Mr.. Oliver said he Was
only trying TO save time for Mr.. VIII
1iAms and expense for the State with
his bill; that 1t would eliminate the
cost OF court procedure and cumber-
some election.
He said he had made a mistake in
his estimate OF the vote at the last
general election that instead of being
100000 1t was only 72,0oo and that
II would only take $4,000 names on
the petition to get the election for
State wide prohibition, why not use
the power we have and save the pad
ding of the registration list ~
Put On One Year.
Mr.. Read, of Portsmouth. offered
m amendment 10 Mr., divers bill,
changing the date from July !. 1914,
to July /. 1915. He said the time limit
was 20 short the liquor people would
not have a chance to dispose of their
property.
In speaking against the substitute,
Mr.. Love. OF Lunenhurg, said that in
the State OF West Virginia prohibition
was enacted by a vote OF the people;
in Georgia, prohibition Has the result
Of legislation and OF the two States.
prohibition in West Virginia was on a
! frmer basis than prohibition in
>Seorgia, and he thought the PROPOSE
sion should be put to the citizens OF
this State so as to have 1t backed by
the sentiment OF all Virginia.
Judge Williams. Of Giles, declared
that as Mr.. Oliver had drawn such u
tine line between Inconsistency and In
sincerity he would charge the gentle
man from Fairfax with the former in
stead OF the latter, as he had done on
Tuesday.
Mr. Lincoln. said Mr. Oliver had adj
gvcrtised in the newspapers that he
was going to call the bluff or the ad-
vpcateS OF the enabling act by intro
ducing his bill that his constituency
was dry and wanted Statewide pro-
hlbition and he believed the Oliver bill
was the quickest means of obtaining II
and to show Mr.. Oliver there was no
bluff he would vote for the substitute.
Right Of the People.
Mr.. Willis. OF Roanoke, declared
that he was going to vote for the en-
Abling act. but in the general election
would vote against State-wi pro-
hipition. II was a democratic propo-
sitlon to give the people OF Virginia
q chance to say what they wanted and
he was going to try and give them
that chance.
Meesrs. Meetzs. Norris and Penning-
ton took the same attitude and made
eloquent speeches against the adoption
Of the Oliver measure.
Mr. Montague, Of Richmond, I'm a
short tall, declared the enabling act
unconstitutional. desptte tho fact that
the beHt lawyers of the State have de-
creed otherwise He was followed BY
4 N. Brnwning. Of Orange. who bitterly
i attac3ed the Oliver blu. He argued
IA pEInci 49, 81 4esaoexncyt