The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1914-02-14

/ the manufacture and sale of wine ant
| Its by-products for export purposes
| The conference committee changed ths
| amendment to exclude from the wine
| by-pioducts. brandy, and to prohibi
/ the manufacture of any by-produci
which contains n greater percentage OF
alcohol than wine itself.
| The Senate amendment PERMITTING
| the continued manufacture for export
| by breweyes now engaged In the bust
ness of beer an dmalt liquors contain.
ing not more than , l-2 per cent OF
alcohol was left unchanged, except for
| the added restriction that such malt
liquors shall be transported only to
territory where they canobe sold legally
The same restriction rs to the sale was
made to apply to wine and Its by-pro-
ducts.
No change was made by the confer
cnce in the Senate amendment which
makes the act inapplicahle to. the
manufacture and sale of apple cider.
The manufacture and sale of this bev-
erage Is left rs under the Sen
II to amendment, TO be regulated by the
present laws.
other Changes Unimportnnt.
The only other change. said Senator
Mapp, was an inconsequential amend
ment of tho section defining the cleo
ton qualification, to which all members
OF the conference agreed. 1t relates
10 Tue tlllc within Wnlcn county ana
city treasurcrs shall be required 10 fur
nish certified list Of all voters who
are entitled to participate in the cleo
ton.
The time for holding the special cleo
ton was left as the Senate amend
ment fixed 1.-THE fourth Tuesday In
September, The conference committee,
said Senator Mapp, regarded the Ian
gunge of the Senate amendment on this
point slightly ambiguous as to the
year. and inserted the words. tho
fourth Tuesday In tho month of Sep
TENDER, 1914" TO remove the uncer-
taintv.
With the conference changes thus
outlined. Senator Mapp undertook a
defense OF what he regarded as the
most important one-thc elimination
of the ballot marked for local option"
and Its replacement with tho original
~ provided ballot marked against
Statewide prohibition"
Local Option Not the Issue.
The real Issue, as we saw It," said
Senator Mapp. rs not between State-
wide prohibition and local option. as
the Senate ballot scheme would have
made 1t appear AS matter OF fact
the rural districts OF the State arc not
under the local option law. That law
applies only TO towns OF 500 or more
The campaigns for the Mann and Byrd
laws have left In the rural districts,
where practical prohibition now OBJ
tains. the general impression thnt local
option is equivalent to prohibition, and
there Is serious danger that many
rural voters might cast their ballots
Tor local option under the impression
that they wero supporting the prohi
oition cause. do not think Il is fair
TO load the Statewide prohibition
movement with such handicap"
we cannot escape the feeling" con
tinued Senator Mapp, that this auas-
ton of the ballot is of the utmost i'm
portance IL 1t is not. Will ask the
opponents of the enabling act IL 1t Is
not that they expect an undue advnnt-
age from 1t that they press the ndop-
ton of the local option ballot"
Hart for EqunI Chance.
VIII tell YOU our reason for want
ing the local option ballot" interrupt
Gu senator Hart with warmth 1--WE
s man' a pniiot like that to keep you
from sending out your orators when
erection TIME comes, to tell the voters
mat vote against State wide probi-
o'lioh means vote against local on
,ioh. We want ballot that Will give
local option Leople the same fair
chahce TO vote their sentiments affirm
ativeiy that you give them with vour
ahrinative ballot for Statewide pro-
hibition" -
senator Mapp. spoke of the disposi-
non OF the prohibition forces. at fret
piush, 10 accept the local option ballot
as lmmaterial to the main issue ,nd
OF the realization that dawned upon
mem iater OF the gravity of such n
chango Temperance lenders nil oyar
the State and majority of mo COW,
inohwealth's prohibition forces. he said
iuVe demanded that the original bol
iots provided In the House bill be- re
s.orou In The interest of fairness to
the prohibition cause.
poes The Senator mean to saw TINT
ne mas had time to hear from a ma
Jorlty OF the States prohibition forcoa
since he himself, together with all RI =
o.her members of the Senate. voted for
the local option ballot, few dava
hso! asked Senator Lesner.
ISM rather the prohibition lend
eTs In Richmond, and not the aahercnts
Oh me cause In the State Mt large, to
mnloh lhe senator from Accomac re-
ieFs' mat nave caused him to change
ms 'hind!' inquired Senator Montague.
addressing himself to Senator MaDp.
Hepndiutes lnsinuation.
senator hlapp replied that he was
hiihseif absolutely responsible for his
stana IN the matter. II the questions
just asked him were meant to insjnuate
that he had taken orders from anybodv
In Richmond or elsewhere, he said he
repudlated 1t emphaticaIly
i assure the Senator that I had no
such Intention" replied Senator Mon
taeue.
From the discussion of tho ballot
senator Mapp proceeded 10 defense of
the committees amendment to tho Sen
ate provision relating To wine and beer
IN adding tho restriction that these
products shall not he sold in territory
where their sale Is illegal, he said. the
conference met the hysterical eleven tn
hour cry raised by some OF the anti
prohibition newspapers that tho en-
abiing act proposed to protect Virginia
against the ravages OF alcohol, and MT
/ the same time permit domestic wine
and beer manufacturers to debauch the
nelshboring States that now have pro-
hibitory laws
senator Cannon, of Richmond, here
directed the attention OF Senator Mann
TO the fact that the prohibition Sena-
sors were themselves responsible 10,
the Inclusion OF the wine and cider
amendments In any form. since IL they
had joined forces with the opposition
on this point the objectionable amend
incnts would have been voted down
Needed Wine Amendment
10 this Senator Mapp replied with
the statement that as far as he per-
sonally was concerned. he would have