Evening Republican, Volume 15, Number 23, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 27 January 1911 — BILL AMENDING COUNTY OPTION LAW PASSED. [ARTICLE]

BILL AMENDING COUNTY OPTION LAW PASSED.

Proctor Bill Establishes Cities, Townships and Territory Ontside of Incorporated Cities as Unit.-

The Proctor bill amending the county local option law, with the units of Incorporated city, township and territory inr a township outside an incorporated city, in conformity with the platform pledge of the democratic party, passed the House of Representatives Thursday by a vote of 60 to 39. The bill passed the Senate Tuesday afternoon by a vote of 29 to 21. The act will he enrolled this morIng and then will be taken to the executive office for the signature of Governor Marshall. It is Bald to be the first time in the history of any state that a local option bill has been amended by changing the unit of local option.

Representatives Greiger, of Laporte and Porter counties, Van Horne, of Lake and Newton counties, Grimmer, of Lake, and Wider, of Elkhart. Republicans, voted with the democrats for the bill. Representatives Merriman, of Wells county, Clore, of Johnson county, and Higgins, of Boone county, democrats, voted with the republican minority against the passage of the bill. Representative Joseph M. Cravens, of Jefferson county, democratic “whip” of the House, a strong temperance man and the representative of a strong temperance county, although in the House of Representatives a few minutes before the local option bill came up for consideration, was not in his seat and did not respond to his name on the roll call for votes. It is said that Mr. Cravens was beseiged by democrats from his county not to vote for the bill, and in view of the fact that it was a democratic platform measure, he decided not to vote at all. Several members of the House explained their votes.' Representative Greiger declared that he was a member of the special session of the legislature when the county local option law was passed. He voted with his party at that time, he said, and he voted with it again during the session of 1909, when the democrats made an-attempt to repeal the' law. He did this, he said, because he believed the people had not spoken on the question. Tetter, hs said, Laporte county went “wet” by a majority of 4,800 and Porter county went “wet” by 600 majority. “It seems to me,” said Greiger, “that the only thing for me to do is to obey the commands of my constituents. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I vote aye.” There was applause from the democratic side of the House.

Representative Guild, from Starke and Pulaski counties, declared that while his district was democratic by 400, the two counties had cast a combined majority against the saloons of 500. “In behalf of the mothers, sons and daughters and the homes,” said he, “and every good business interest in my constituency, which gave me 600 majority, and in behalf of my own conscience, I vote no.” This explanation was greeted by applause from the republican side of the house. Representative Anderson Johnson, of Howard county, in explaining hia vote, declared that 100 per cent of the public schools and the Sunday schools, 75 per cent of the republican party and 75 per cent of the democratic party in his county we?e against the measure. “Therefore,” said he, “I vote No.” The republicans applauded him. "" Representative Maddox, of Blackford and Grant counties, explained his vote. He said he stood firmly as a republican, although elected from a democratic county containing twentyfour saloons. “The saloon men,” said he, “in my city—Hartford City—do not want this change, because all the counties around us are ‘dry.’ We get the ‘ragtag’ and the ‘bobtails’ of all the other counties. I have seen the time when intoxicating liquor ruined my home. My father lived to be 74 years old without touching a drop of liquor, and— ’’ ‘ Speaker Veneman interrupted Representative Maddox with the announcement that the explanation of a vote, under the rules, was limited to one minute. The members of the House gave unanimous consent for Mr. Maddox to proceed. Mr. Maddox ended by saying that he thanked the House for its attention. “How do you vote?" shouted a memter. “I vote ‘No,’” said Mr. Maddox. Representative Oldaker, republican, of Fayette and Wayne counties — Wayne county being “wet" and Fayette county being “dry”—declared that he had been elected despite the fact that Wayne county was “wet.” He said he had told the ’‘liberals” during the campaign that he would ►vote to defeat them. “I told them,” said be, “that I would vote against this bill If I was the only one in the House who did. I am going to vote as I said I would, and I—“Well, vote,” shouted Representative Thornton. “We are getting hungry. We’re going to be here all night at this rate*" “Teal Tea!” shouted other democratic members of the House. “Vote! Vote! Go ahead!”

“Well,” said Oldaker, “I vote ‘No.’ His declaration was greeted by applause from the republican minority and the temperance adherents in the galleries. , - .*• -

Representative Troyer, of Elkhart county, replied to other members of the House who had discussed the action of his colleague, Representative Wider, republican, of Elkhart county, who spoke in favor of the passage of the bill, that he had been elected, he was convinced, to vote against the, measure. Representative VanHerne, republican, said that in voting for the measure he believed he voted the sentiments of a majority of the people in his district. “Lake county,” he said, “had a population of 82,000 people, while a petition asking that the county option law be not changed, signed only by' thirty persons, had been sent to hfm. The majority of the people In my district” said he, “want this law changed, and therefore, Mr. Speaker, I vote aye.” VanHorne was loudly applauded by the democrats. _

The roll call for votes showed the result to be 60 to 31 for the passage of the bill. This announcement by Speaker Veneman made at 5:30 o’clock, provoked prolonged cheering among the democrats and thunderous applause from the liberal sympathizers in the galleries and lobbies. Representative Seidensticker, chairman of the committee on public morals, moved that the vote be reconsidered and that his motion then be laid upon the table. This was done. The motion was made, for the purpose of “cinching” the vote, as It does, and preventing the bill from coming up again. The title of the hill will stand as the title of the act.