New Britain herald., 1925-04-22
10 Division of Vote On Rejection But Par liamentary Challenge Is Lost by Count of 148 to 60.
Salisbury Champion of Measure Calls Attack 'Bunkum"- Local SOlon Says It Has Dangerous Principle.

State Capitol, Hartford, April 22. The Wheeler bill, which took its name from Chief Justice George w. Wheeler of the Connecticut supreme court of errors who had sponsored it as a means to secure more drastic enforcement of the 18th amendment than can be now secured, according 10 states attorneys. by the state en- forcement laws, was rejected by the house of representatives this after noon. The senate rejected the bill last week.
 No Division of Vote There was no division of the vote on the question of rejection but a vote to order the previous question on the motion 10 reject showed 14S for and 60 against. Before that Representative Bell of Salisbury who was for the bill could not mus ter the necessary one-f1fth to have roll call.
 The debate on the committee re- port was a vigorous one, and MT. Bell fought stubbornty his fellow committee mempers. There were some parliamentary maneuvers but Mir. Bell was unable for lack of votes to win a point.
 filling Sums It Up Just before the voteI to reject was made House Leader filling made Q summing up of the Wheeler bill in which he claimed it had a dangerous principle in it--that of invasion of the constitutional rights of q citizen MT. Bell in his argument for the bill and arraignment of the commit tee for acting summarily on the bill said that it was a most humiliatng spectacle to see the president of the state bar association charge that lawyers were intimidated" and so would not appear against the bill Mir. Bell said he for one did not want the state turned over to a lot of bootleggers and their patrons"
 He claimed the judiciary commit ice acted only on the original bill and never gave thought to the substitute one.
 The house adjourned after the bill was rejected.
 Debate Was Lively
 The Wheeler bill produced long and lively debate. House Leader filling moved acceptance of the committee report and rejection of the bill. Mir. Bell of the judiciary committee moved division of the question. MT. filling saw no reason for this, claiming the house session would be interminable" If this were done. Debate began at once.
 Air of Tenseness.
 There was an air of tenseness in the house chamber when Clerk Hick- cy, going through business from the senate came to the Wheeler bill. Every seat was filled and many spec tators had chairs or were standing against the walls. The gallery was we'll filled.
 The debate started with a vigor that apparently made good the fore- cast for lively session. MT. Alling speaking in opposition to MT. Bells motion declared the committee had fully considered the bill and it's sub stitute offered at the hearing a week ago. The committee, he said had voted unanimously to reject the bill, and that MT. Bell discovered he had voted on something he didn't know about" and so reserved his right to oppose the report. Mir. Allins could see no reason for dividing the question and knew there was nc chance of the senate receding from it's rejection. He thought every mem- ber knew how he would vote and for himself he did not believe any fur ther legislation was needed on this subject.
 Bell Makes Plea.
 Mir. Bell said the bill was an i'm portant one and he hoped the house would not give it the Summary treatment" 1t received from the committee.
 Applause was frequent especially when Speaker Darbie, who had left the chair after placing E. T. Clark of Haddam in it. took the floor. He said the division of the motion would merely make amendments possible He said the question was not one of prohibition. traffic in Iiquor or buyers responsibility, but one Of the constitutional rights. He thought the bill was blow at the American form of government and the principles of constitutional lib- erty. He said the bill was prepared by the head of the judicial branch of the government assisted by States Attorneys.
 Claims Infringement,
 What kind of law will it be fl two departments-the administrative and the judiciaf-infringe on the rights Of the legislative branch?" he asked. He declared that the three departments of th government must
 (Continued on Page is,l