[opinions on a prohibition law]
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
THURSDAY, Feb. 18, 1875.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
THIRTY-SEVENTH DAY.
House re-assembled at 3:30 p.m., Speaker Shadd in the Chair.
Quorum present.
H. B. No. 622, an Act to repeal an Act to amend section 2459 of the Revised Code of 1871, was taken up and the vote whereby the bill passed was reconsidered.
The question being put, shall the bill pass, the Governor’s veto to the contrary notwithstanding, and a two-thirds vote being required, the bill failed to pass by the following vote:
[list of names in vote tally, 51-38]
PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS.
MR. SPEAKER: I vote to sustain the Governor, because I recognize the law of 1874, as a step in the right direction. Conscientiously, as a temperance man, I cannot vote to let down the bar to the horrible evil of drunkenness.
A. A. ROGERS.
Mr. Randolph explained his vote as follows: I hope I am one who can well judge of the good and bad effects of liquor, and all the effects which the law would have if retained upon our statute books. I do not believe the law is perfect. I do not believe it will do much good, because it is meeting a great and unreasonable opposition. It cannot do much good at this time, but I know the bad effects that whisky has upon all classes, and most especially upon the ignorant, and more of them are of my race than of any other. Thousands of widows are made so by it, and thousands of boys and girls are made orphans by it, and poverty glares thousands of families in the face, and I am conscious of the necessity for some law to restrict, to as great an extent as possible, the destroying demon. While a great revenue is derived from its sale, we unfortunately get from it all the sad results that I have mentioned above. Better, far better that we should never have our hands soiled with the revenue so derived. I do not say, nor do I wish to be understood as saying, that I am one of those who never use it; and on that account I feel better prepared to judge of its effects. I think the law should remain unchanged, and I think that the Governor’s veto is proper, and I vote to sustain him under this conviction.
By Mr. Gayles. Mr. Speaker – I vote no, because I believe the Governor to be exactly right in every position taken in his veto message. Let us do all we can toward rendering our people virtuous, prosperous, and happy, even while we cannot do all we would desire.
[…]
By Mr. Harris. Mr. Speaker: Is it right that we should pass this bill over the Governor’s veto? I say that we ought not. This evil is one of the greatest that disturbs society, and, sir, I appeal to the members of my own race on this floor to look at their poverty-stricken condition throughout this State! Let us first give this law a fair trial.
At 6:30 o’clock, Mr. Kendrick moved to adjourn. The House adjourned.