The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1918-02-16
EXTRA SESSION PROPOSED.
HAD LAW ENFORCEMENT FUND
NOT BEEN ALLOWED, Gov
ERNOR WOULD HAVE
ACTED.
Conferces Reached Agreement Aftcr,
Hearing Plain Talk from the Gov.
crnor-fIouse Fought Against II.

law enforcement had not been insert.
cd In the general appropriations bill.
or had the amount been insuffi..
c'ent TO make operative the provisions
OF the prohibition law. South Caroline.
would have faced an extraordinar,
session OF the general assembly.
This became known today when IL
was divulged that Governor Manning
In his statement to the free confer.
ence committee on the measure. told
the conferees plainly that the people
OF the State would hold him respon-
siole for the enforcement of the law,
and unless he would be furnished with
the means Of bringing law vioiators to
taw he would be obliged to place the
blame where II belonged-on the gen.
eral assembly.
The pivotal fight in the house this
year was on the law enforcement
fund which was defeated I'm that body
Ivy a large majority. following the re-
fusal OF the ways and means commit
tee. by majority vote OF one, to in
Eert 10 In tho general appropriation
measure. The economists OF tina,
body were opposed TO the appropria-
ton on the theory OF extravaganza.
Passing their argument on the prom
ise that the sheriffs of the State will
enforce the prohibition law. When
the measure went TO the senate that
chamber inserted the fund. making
A. $500
When the item reached free con-
Terence there was a two-fold fight:
the house members wanted the ap-
propriation eliminated entirely, or. In
lou OF that. reduced one-half. with
the proviso that the constab ables of the
governor would not search personal
Nsggage. After the conferees of the
Two bodies had gotten together or
the item allowing $4,000 for the
tpnd and giving the governor the au
>tpority to use the unexpended balance
from the appropriation of last year.
which made the fund approximately
$4,000. split came on the proviso
about disallowing constables to search
Is,rsonal baggage.
The house conferees wanted the
proviso inserted in the bill, but the
serate members of the committee
Grenuously objected TO any such leg
bnaton. IL Is understood that the
senate members then went to their
body for instructions. The senate. in
executive session. told it's conferees.
~ Is stated. that under no circum-
Stances should the proviso go into the
oiI. and approval was given the
100000 for law enforcement. Thus
fortified the senate conferees return
cd to the conference to hold out to
tho end.
The governor was appealed to and
ne wrote letter to r. j. Smyrl. chief
constable. instructing him and his
men not TO search the personal bag
gage OF travellers unless they have
oeen hitherto convicted OF selling in
toxicating liquor I'm contravention of
W." or unless the constable has
certain knowledge that there Is liquor
an the said baggage" IL was only
when the governors letter was sent
10 the committee that certain of the
mouse conferees would 40 back into
the conference room. They were de-
"rmlned that constables should not
nave the authority to indiscriminately
nc through the personal effects of re-
spectaole travellers when there was no
1u''ihcation for suspecting that these
travellers were transporting LIQUOR.
FOLLOWING Is the governors letter
to the chief constable:
IL having been intimated to me
thnt the State constables have prob-
AMY misunderstood former instruc-
tons I'm enforcing the prohibition Iav
desire now to instruct you and the
Su''e constables that they shall not
search. or undertake To search. tho
baggage OF any traveller. unless that
traveller has heretofore been indicted
Tor selling intoxicating liquors in con-
ravention OF law. or unless such per
son has warrant describing the per-
son or baggage to be searched. or un-
less the constable has certain knowl-
edge that there is liquor in said bag.
gage"
The letter written by Gov. Man
ming In no way abridges nor amends
former instructions issued 10 State
constabloa They have been re