The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1914-01-23

atical move on the part of its ad-
vocates. declaring that by taking away
whiskey from Virginia, the Golfers of
Baltimore and Washington would be
enriched to the extent of $4,000
600.
He told of trip through the dry
States of North Carolina and Ten
nessee and how the people of those
States broke the law by serving drinks
In coffee cups and such. using this as
an argument that prohibition did not
prohibit
Norris arose on a point OF order. de-
claring the speaker was ne combining
himself to the subject. That State
wide prohibition was not the discus
sion, but whether the people should
have the right to vote on the subject
Mr.. Oliver leaped to his feet, saying
that the subject was Statewide pro-
Its meanest and lowest form. The
chair ruled with Mr.. Myers.
Mr.. Myers attacked the Webb bill,
declaring that 1t was effective. He
strongly advocated local option, with
open saloons in the city of Rich
mond. He eulogized the manner the
saloons were at present conducted,
stating that high license was the only
method Of handling the hquor traf-
fic.
Would Not Adjourn.
Following Mr. Myers many attempts
were made to adjourn for the day,
but the majority of the members
barred the move. wishing to get the
ena bling act as far on its path as
possible. 1t was finally agreed to ad-
journ until $3.50 o'clock for contin-
uation of the debate.
Promptly at $3.50 o'clock the house
convened, and the main fight of the
day took place. Mr.. Oliver, leader OF
Ihs opponents, offered resolution
that the debate continue until 4:30
O'Clock. then the chair be vacated UNI
i'll O'Clock in the evening, and the
debate continue until 10 o'clock. 1T
was proposed that the vote be put
off until 1880 O'Clock today.
MIR. Oliver. in his reasons for this
resolution, charged that fair deal
was not being given the minority;
that at least five hours should be given
over to debate on the subject, each
side taking two hours and a half He
said that he did not want to delay
the passage of the bill, but it was
ONLY proper that opponents be
given their chance to do their duty.
This precipitated the battle
Objections to the resolutions poured
from every side MIR. Houston said
the proposition was absurd; that If
Mr. Oliver wanted to debate the meas
ure. take the entire afternoon, and
have done with il, and offered a sub
stitnte resolution thar a vote be taken
on the hill at o'clock.
Again objections fiooded the chair.
many members declaring that i'm
pnFtant committee meetings were
SIaied for the afternoon. MIR. Hous-
fV.8 answered these objection by say
1nz That his committee was scheduled
10 nave several important hearings,
but that he had pat them aside to
thFeSh out the matter. Finally 1t was
decided 10 do away with committee
meetings, and Mr.. Houston S substi-
tute resolution was adopted by "a vote
OF 81 to 81.
AS 1t was then AIS o'clock, Judge
Williams announced that the oppo-
sition could have one hour of the time,
and the friends of the bill would take
only forty-five minutes. and the pa
iron of the bill arranged the schedule
Of those defending the measure, while
Mr. Oliver mapped out his attack.
Both sides retired TO the corridor to
hold their discussion. The retirement
OF the two leaders was the cause Of
much fun, and Speaker Cox had great
difficulty keeping the house In order.
Mectxe Urges BilI.
Mr.. Meetze. of Prince Williams, an
ardent advocate of the enabling act.
was the first speaker under this ar
rangement, and he lost no time In
making himself plain as to where he
stood.
He made scathing attack on what
he termed the "accursed liquor evil"
declaring that It was bankrupting the
State The loss of revenue recited by
Al = I15x hi ts,
what whiskey was costing the State,
that for every dollar it put in
the treasury, it cost the State two
dollars. He referred TO the bill APP
propriating $4,000 to fill the deficit
in criminal expenses, holding this up
as an object of what the liquor traf-
fic was doing for the State.
Mr.. Myers took exception to Mr..
Meetze's statement that the opponents
of the bill were representing the liquor
interest by saying that he had not
even been approached by anyone to
vote against the bill
n MIR. Hobson took up the fight, Civ
ing his record for not having taken
a drink, and decrying the methods of
other prohibition States of disregard
ing the law. He declared that should
the State Of Virginia go dry, Mary
land. Pennsylvania and New York
would Hood the State with Whlskey.
This statement was taken up by
Mr.. Buck. OF Washington, who fierce
Iy denounced the cry against prohibit
ton. 1t is not question of does
prohibition prohibit. but whether the
people of this State shall have their
rights or not" He waxed eloquent
on democracy, and was rewarded with
n roar OF applause from the galleries.
Mr.. Leedy. OF Page. in turn, took the
opposition and answered Mr.. Buck in
kind, playing strongly on the consti-
tutiouaiity of the question before the
house.
Nhiskey Men Responsible.
Mr.. Pennington. of Lee. in reply to
Mr. Myers statement in regard to the
disregard of law in Tennessee, said
that he lived near the border Of that
State, and from what he had seen. the
saloon and whiskey people were re-
sponsible for this condition OF affairs.
He said that to discredit the prohibit
ton laws Of the State. they had poured
money there TO encourage the viola
ton Of the law. and paid the fines
when the violators were caught. and
then sent out the word that prohibit
ton did not prohibit to create false
sentiment against 1t.
In arguing against the loss of reve-
nue. Mr.. Pennington said that when
the gentleman from the city OF Rich
.mond had counted the $19.00o,s00