The Bamberg herald. [volume] (Bamberg, S.C.) 1891-1972, 1916-06-22
WHY ACT WAS NOT SIGNED.
Governor Manning Explains Position
on Two-quart Law.


letter inquiring about the two-quart
act, Gov. Manning wrote as follows:
''In the beginning permit me to
state that am very glad indeed that
your interest in the administration
of affairs of government and in the
enforcement of law in South Carolina
is such that you feel free to write me
in reference to the two-Quart bill.
l am, glad to have the opportunity to
advise you that my refusal to sign
this bill at the present time is purely
in the interest of temperance in South
Carolina, and with all regard for the
views of it's advocates and with great
admiration for their high purpose and
fine service.
"You will recall that the legisla-
ture at it's 1915 session passed what
is known as the gallon-a-month act.
This same legislature passed an act
! referring the question of prohibition
or local option to the voters of South
Carolina in a special election held in
September, 1915.
1T has been claimed by some that
there are constitutional defects in the
gallon-a-month law: AS the head of
the executive department of the State
I would not presume to pass on this
question. That is matter for the
judicial department. My duty is to
direct the enforcement of this act so
long as it remains on the statute
books unchanged by legislative enact
ment or judicial decision.
Pending i'm Court.
81 have been Informed that this
law is now being tested in the courts.
and the friends of prohibition having
knowledge of this action introduced
during the 1916 session of the leg
islature a bill intended to reenact
this gallon-a-month law in such a
manner as to leave no question as to
it's constitutionality. When this bill
was introduced and finally passed
through both houses of the general
assembly, a good many changes had
been made in it and number of
amendments tackled on. In fact, the
act as finally passed was widely diff
ferent, I am told, from the bill orig
inally introduced. When this act
came to me for approval or disap-
proval, I discussed the entire matter
with the authors Of the bill, together
with some of the leading prohibi-
tionists of the State. In addition to
the advice and counsel gained from
these gentlemen, who are very much
interested in the cause of prohibi-
ton, I received a large number of
letters from citizens in various parts
of the State, urging me for various
reasons not to approve this act.
Liquor ad Libitum?
"This condition confronted me:
The gallon-a-month act was before
the courts and this new act, if signed,
would automatically repeal the gal
lon-a-month act; and in case it was
attacked and set aside by the courts,
we would be left without any legal
limitation upon the amount Of liquor
that might be imported.
'It seemed to me, therefore, that
in view of the information that had
been placed before me, the highest
interests of the State would best be
served were I to hold this act in
abeyance rather than take chances.
For these and other reasons which l
deem inadvisable to make public at
the present time, I deemed it in the
interest of temperance and in fair
ness to the people of the State that
the two-quart act be not signed at
present, but that it be held here pend
ing the outcome of the legal fight on
the gallon-a-month act. The two
quart act has not been vetoed, but is
merely held in this Office as above
stated.
sI have written you frankly in ref
erence to the matter and I trust you
will understand and appreciate my
position. The principle of law en-
forcement is very dear to my heart
and in my opinion is Of paramount
Importance in South Carolina at the
present time. I am doing all in my
power to see that the present laws
are enforced and shall continue this
policy with unabated vigor and with
out compromise so long as I am gov
ernor.
''Vox Populi."
"Since the State has spoken so
clearly for prohibition, it becomes
the duty of Democrat and certainly
+bo+ of O nrh1ic official to accept the