Evening Republican, Volume 15, Number 48, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 25 February 1911 — BOOZE LEGISLATION AND THAT NEW CONSTITUTION. [ARTICLE]

BOOZE LEGISLATION AND THAT NEW CONSTITUTION.

Indiana General Assembly Still Plodding to Get Governor’s Hobbies Through at Regular Session. It is a dull evening in Indianapolis without a democratic caucus. Two things are nightly djscussed by the majority in the secrecy of their caucus chamber, where an effort is make to make all insurgents against the booze and constitution bills be good. The following day the things discussed in caucus are introduced into the legislature, where a democratic majority, whipped into line-by dire threats and profuse promises, carries things along without regard to any influence except that exercised by the breweries and the saloon league. Friday things w,ent democratic with a vengeance. The so-called Proctor regulative and restrictive bill was advanced to engrossment after undergoing some alterations that will contribute to the hope of planting a few saloons here and there in “dry” territory and of leaving all that exist at this time in “wet” sections. Strange to say that this bill which Senator Halleck opposed in the senate, and which caused the Jasper County Democrat to accuse him of voting with the brewers, was opposed Ih the house by all republicans except Van Horne, of Lake county, who represents “wet” territory and votes for anything that looks good to the brewers. The bill was amended in many ways. Practically all the amendments that went through were of democratic inspiration and aimed to make it easier to establish saloons. Several good amendments offered by republicans were defeated. One of these was to stop “treating” in saloons, which is regarded as the worst of drinking evils. This amendment was voted down 63 to 37. This makes it easy to start a little game of treats that results in a general drunk and causes a lot of innocent women and children to go without beefsteak for breakfast. But a little thing like the happiness of a few thousand homes don’t amount to much in a legislature where the control is centered in greedy brewers and men ambitious to engage in a business that closes eyes to everything but personal profit. Another amendment proposed that no saloon be allowed closer than 500 feet from any church, school or cemetery. This was defeated by a vote of 53 to 33.

The big surprise at the Friday session was the turning of Representative Cravens against the bill. Cravens is the democratic floor leader and. his act was* so much of a surprise that there was talk of deposing him as the leader. Fear that such action would result, caused the democrats to decide late in the afternoon not to hold a joint caucus that night. Cravens is a temperance man at heart and he has grown sick of the effort of his party to draft legislation favorable to the saloon interests. He was almost the only democrat, however, that did not stand pat He introduced a battery of twenty-two amendments all in a batch, which, had they passed, would -have defeated the purpose of the measure. The democratic leader charged that the bill created a vested right in that it meant a monopoly for those who procured licenses and were able under the protection of the law to transfer the licenses from one to another. Mr. Cravens said he -did not Bpeak from a temperance standpoint, but that he came from a “dry” county and he thought he should have some recognition, even though the majority of bis party was from “wet” sections. Representative Cravens said he was willing that the pledge of the democratic platform should be fulfilled, but that he could not see how (hat should bind himself or other democratic members from “dry” territory to fix matters so that a vested privilege was granted every time a saloon license was granted. He declared that the passage of the bill as it was worded would mean that the breweries of Indiana could be controlled by English corporations. Then Representative Beidenstlcker. the mouthpiece of the governor, said that he had conferred with Tom Marshall, who is a “good” constitutional lawyer, and the governor had laughed at the suggestion of “vested right Then Representative Furnas asked “Which constitution was the governor referring to?" and Seidensticker got mad and shouted back to Furnas that It “was none of his business.” Thus, goes on the dally grind for the restoration of saloons. With a bunch of amendments tagged on to it the bill was passed to engrossment and Proctor, of the senate, began mak-

ing plans to advance his third “regit>lative" measure, which is to take the place of the measure rushed through during the earlier part of the session and which the majority fears is not constitutional. Proctor is fathering about all the socalled liquor regulative measures and his style of regulation seems to be to place saloons where they are not wanted and to clothe them with the appearance of respectability. His saloon regulative measures look a good deal like wolves in sheeps' clothing. Proctor bill No. 3, is designated the “last hope” of the brewers and there is much conjecturing as to what they will undertake to run into it at the last moment Probably our governor with his great constitutional mind, will see to it that the breweries and saloon interests do not get any the worst of it, even if Proctor’s third effort falls short of granting all the approved “regulation” that seems so important. The “Tom Marshall” constitution was also sent to engrossment in the senate Friday but not until several democrats had assailed it and thh governor vigorously. Governor Marshall was charged with dominating the legislature with threats to keep them there until summer unless his new constitution is passed. Several members said that they had been raised to regard the constitution as a sacred thing and only to be revised at a time as the imperative needs of the state demanded, but the governor thought that it was simple enough to write a new constitution and that he had been working ever since December to get his right. It was “right” enough to satisfy a democratic ma jority and was whooped along. It seems to us that Tom Marshall was having seven kinds of duck fits during his campaign for election about the interference of a governor and we believe he belittled Hanly in many ways fpr his demand that the county option law be passed, but here he is only two years later, audacious enough to dash off in a few hours a new constitution for the state and dominating enough to threaten to call a special session of the legislature if it is not passed. In the meantime expenses are piling up like all sixty. It may be remembered that one of Marshall’s hobbies during his campaign was to “keep down expenses.” He said while here that he thought the office of oil inspector should be abolished. He said that there were 26 subinspectors and that the whole bunch could be done away with and their salaries wouid mean a great saving to the state of Indiana. That is what Tom said. This is what Tom did. He looked over the 26 districts where oil inspectors did business and then at the long list of applicants for the job. He whacked off a name here and there until he igot the list narrowed down to 42 with real claims for “pie.” Then he redistricted the state for the purpose of oil inspections and made 42 districts to take care of the 42 faithful ones with the big endorsements. It will be remembered that he thought it a blooming shame that the state of Indiana paid the house rent for the governor and he said he would not accept it It will be remembered also that he refused to accept it and thus saved the state SI,OOO a year. iSien he had a legal advisor appointed for the governor at a salary of $3,500. Last week at the suggestion of the governor a law was shot through that provides for eight instead of four bank inspectors and that gives the governor the appointive power. Another boost for the governor’s machine and a substantial boost for expenses. Some people may wonder why this big democratic majority has not passed a bill providing for the guarantee of bank deposits, a thing about which they were so solicitous during the campaign. Why don’t somebody ask somebody what makes democrats so forgetful? Well, time will tell, and we rather expect that it will tell v some queer things that the democrats have done in this hasty and rampant scramble to exceed its “wet” platform promises.