The Wilmington morning star., 1941-02-13
GROUP ADVANCES
new WINE Bill,
Measure Would Prohibit Sala
Of Fortified Wine in Each
Of "a Dry Counties
BY CHARLES w. DANIEL.

yL
RALEIGH, Feb. 12.-lRLTb.
house finance committee had an.
other bird bath in the state win,
barrel today and came up with
brand new Governors win.
bill"
The committee voted a favor
able report, with only Uzzell =,
Rowan dissenting, to a subcom.
mittee bill which would prohibi,
the sale of all fortified wines in
each of the "a dry counties and
restrict the sale of such wines in
wet counties to A. B. C. stores
The measure would permit tb.
sale in dry counties of unfortified
wines. the alcoholic contents oi
which do not exceed IA per cent
Representative Jarvis of Run.
combe, who presented the new bill
to the finance subcommittee-com.
posed of members of both house
and senate finance groups - said
the measure had been drawn with
the intention of incorporating all
the Governor wishes with resnect
to wine.''
Just before the committee voted
the favorable report, however
Quinn of Duplin, an avowed drv
asked Jarvis if Governor Brough.
ton had seen the bill.
Jarvis answered that Broughtor
had not examined the bill-because
"there has not been time"-but
declared its provisions were in
complete accord with the desires
of the Governor as set forth in 2
conference yesterday between
Broughton and members of the
wine subcommittee.
The new wine bill, substitute for
HB 101 introduced several avs
ago by Reynolds of Buncombe, in.
corporates all the provisions of the
Reynolds measure with an amend.
ment offered by Jarvis to restrict
sales of fortified wine in wet coun-
ties to A. B. c. stores.
HB 101 was reported unfavor.
ably.
Suggestions of John Caffey Of
Greensboro, secretary of the North
Carolina Association of Wine Con-
troll, for the control of wine sales
through establishment of a wine
division within the present struc.
ture of the board of alcoholic con-
troll were completely ignored in
the Jarvis measure.
Caffey had submitted both to
the joint finance committee and
to the subcommittee detailed to
study the wine Situation an
draw a Suitable" bill, propositions
for redefining fortified wine" and
for the order regulation Of its sale
in all counties which desired pr.
vate stores.
Before the committee acted to
report the Jarvis bill favorably,
Uzzell of Rowan had offered
Substitute" bill which would have
permitted sale of five high type"
fortified wines not to contain
more than IA per cent alcohol-in
all counties. The substitute meas
ure was rejected in an overwhelm-
ing voice vote.
After the vote rejecting his pro-
posal, Uzzell asked Jarvis:
DO you believe in local option
County control Of the sale Of in
toxicants)?"
Jarvis replied that he did.
However, the new wine bill would
permit exemption of county from
its provisions only by enactment
of local statute.
| Edwards of Beaufort, a men,
ber of the subcommittee and signer
of the Jarvis bill, declared that,
speaking personally as dry. Il
am very strongly in favor Of local
option and I don't think that we
fellows from the wet countise
want to force any of our opinions
upon any other counties"
''People don't drink like they
vote and surely don't vote like
they drink" Edwards asserted.
Jarvis said of "the Governor
bill' that it would Simply place
wine in the same category as liq-
uor." l