Historical Newspapers of South Carolina

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

??? ? ' ' 1 ?? *- - g- - - - -vjf o : VOLT LI. WNNISBORG, 8. C., WEDNESDAY, JUNE 9, 1897. NO. 44. ? i, . rrs no. .. " ' 'aigiV" " ."".I?J . - . 1 1 JUDGE SMOSTON'S OPINION j IN THE NOW FAMOUS DISPENSARY j CASE. Fni? T?xt of the Opinion in the Case that Knocked the Dispensary Law Out, *5V Meh Wil? i>e Read With Interest. Knowing the interest that is taken in the recent decision of Judge Simonton declaring the Dispensary law unconstitutional we present below the full text of the opinion upon which that decision was based: The United States of America, District of South Carolina?In the Circuit Court ? Fourth Circuit?In Equity. The W. A. VanJercock Company vs. S. W. Vance, W. I3ahr, J. M. Scott. W. Liv-1 angston, C. S. Moseley, M. I'eterman? Simcnton, Circuit J udge. This is a bill in equity filed by complainant, a corporatiou of the State of California, against S. W. Vance, "who is State commissioner under the dispensary law, and W. X. Bahr and others, who are State constables appointed to pat this law in execution. The bill alleges that the complainant is the owner cf vineyards ir. the State of Cclifornia, and that it manufactured from grapes of such vineyards well known pure wines, brandies 5 if anu. omer aauuoj\> l'u.i'utu.iaiijr ui tunws, rhine wine, burgundies and champagne That by its traveling agent the complainant took orders from certain citizens and residents of the State of South Carolina to deliver to each of them certain original packages of wines, etc., products of its vineyards, filled said orders and shipped from San Faancisco in California to Charleston, South [ Carolina, by rail, a carload of its products, I containing 73 separate original packages, for g each of its said customers, all marked -with I its name and address in California, adopting ] ^ ^ T?] AO f) Jit f r* I IU13 UIUUC VI 21IIMVJ VCfcti.V?v4. iu v4VkvA. w ? obtain a large reduction ia freight. Thai j the goods so shipped arrived ia Charleston, j passing through the hands of several corn-1 mon carriers in continuous route: and there- j upon were seized without warrant by de- J fendants Bahr and Scott, and <>0 of the packages were shipped by said constables to Columbia to John F. Gaston, then State commissioner, got into his hands and then into the hands of his successor, S. W. Vance, with full notice of the unlawful seizure and I that Vance, notwithstanding refuses to de- j iiver mem 10 coinpia.iuu.ut its ageui,, aivci , repeated demands and threatens to convert and sell tlie same to citizens of South Carol!- j na. That these same constables and others, j claiming like authority, threaten to seize in | like manner, all wines shipped by complain-1 ant into this State wherever found and for | whatever purpose shipped, arriving in said j city of Charleston, and in like manner to j shin nnrl deliver the same to said S. W. I Vance, who likewise threatens to convert the same, to the great damage of complainant ana to the obstruction and destruction of its lawful business and interstate commerce and trade in its wines, etc., with citizens and residents of South Carolina. The bill then alleges the shipment of another importation of wines, etc., in separate original packages from its vineyards in California, upon orders from residents of South Corolini, the arrival of the same in South Carolina and the wrongful seizure of the same by State constables. That other orders have been obtained for other residents of South Carolina for separate original packages and that upon such order complainant proposes to ship such packages to South Carolina in due course of interstate commerce, and that in the future it intends to seek similar orders and to ship thereupon similar original packages into the State of - South Carolina. The bill further alleges jC. that it intends in the course of its business further and in addition to such shipments so - 2**' ordered by customers in advance, to ship also from San Francisco, California, to its agent in the State of South Carolina and to store and warehouse in South Carolina and to sell.in the State or South Carolina, in me j original, unbroken packages as imported as aforesaid, to residents of South Carolina, its wines and liquors, products of its vineyards in the due and lawful exercise of its rights under the Constitution and laws of the United States. And that the defendants threaten to seize, take and carry away, convert and sell all such shipments. The bill then charges thai by the dispensary act of 1S97, under which the defendants seek to justify their action, all wines, beers, ales, alcoholic and other intoxicating liquors are the subjects of lawful manufacture, barter, sale, export and import in the State of South Corolina, and have been and are being and will continue to be lawfully used and consumed as a bevkr? AifiSono or?n rpavipnfQ r? f rhe State I of South Carolina. And that the products o! its vinevards are lawful subjects of interstate andforeign trade and commerce. The bill then charges that the said dispensary law, insofar as it authorizes the acts of the defendants, or in any way attempts to abridge the right of importation of the products of complainant's vineyards, into this State and there to sell in original packages or in any wise hinders and prevents its in tercourse, commerce and trade with citizens and residents of South Carolina, in the products of its vineyards in such original packages, is in conflict with the Constitution of the United Slates and is null and voidThe bill then alleges facts sustaining the jurisdiction of this court and securing the i jurisdiction of the United States supreme? court and prays a temporary, to be followed j by a permanent injunction. Upon the filing of the bill, a rule was is- 3 sued against the defendants to show cause f why the injunction prayed for in the bill be J not granted. I The return sets out three jurisdictional j exceptions. First, that the bill presents no s (.juestion arising under the Constitution and j laws of the United States. Second, that the! bill is defective in its allegations and does j not state a case cominc within the jurisdic-1 tion of this court. Third, that the till pre- j seats no case for the jurisdiction of a court ] of equity as the plaintit? has a plain, ade-! quate and complete remedy at lavr. The j bare inspection of the bill shows these objections to be unfounded. The return then addressed itself to the merits. It sets out clearly that the shipments made by complainant were made by | bill of lading to a gentleman in this State, in j this; hehrtlf" selected as theiicrent of complain-! m an:, for distribution of the packages and per-j pa haps the receipt of the purchase money. It > - then admits the main facts of the bill and J charges that the shipments made by com-1 plainant and those contemplated by it and J the course of dealing in the future which it I intends, are in contravention of the act of as-1 sembly of ISi'7. the amendment to the dis-1 pensarylaw. And that under that act, and j -he other acts which it amends, the course and action o:' the State officials were justified and were right and proper. This case brings up squarely tLz question, "Has a producer of alcoholic liquors in another State, the right under the Constitution of the'United States, in the present condition of the law of South Carolina, to ship into that State his products in original packages and to sell them m the original pack?>V\A? A?,3 AV. oo?t irt f" Vituti upu at; otuv ii-. v.. shipment or upon purchases made after shipment and arrival'.'"' The question is one of grave importance. The very able and exhaustive arguments of counsel on both sides have put the court in possession of every argument which can be used upon it. They-have received the careful vrh r^'n 0710 r'n.- .il'M. tions to "which the}- were addressed, deserve. Section S, AVticie I o? the Constitution of the UaueJ- States declares: --The congress shall have power * * to regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes." The supreme coun of the United States has now established by a current of decisions which cannot be misunderstood, that under this section, congress alone has the right to tix, prescribe and regulate interstate and foreign commerce, and that no one of the States can in any way interfere "with such commerce or prescribe any regulation thereof without the consent of congress. '-While by virtue of its jurisdiction over persons and property within its limits a State may provide lor the security of the lives, iimbs, and comfort of persons and the protection of property so situated, yet a subject matter which has been confided exclu sively to congress by the Constitution, is not within the jurisdiction of the police power of the State unless placed there by congressional action. (Henderson vs. Mayor of New Vork, (S2 U. ?>., 259 Railroad Company vs. iiusen, 95.U. S., 405; Walling vs- Michigan. 110 L:. S., Kobbius v*. Shelby, 12<> t*. S., 4S9.; " luasmuca as laiersuue vuiiii?viv-c, wu- > sisting in the transportatioa, purc^se, sale and exchange of commodities is n<. 'onaiin its character and must be governed by a uniform system, so long as congress doss not pass any law to regulate it or allows the State to do so, it thereby indicates its will that such commerce shall be free and untrammeled."' (County of Mobile vs. Kimball, ll>2 17. S., 09:,'; Brown vs. Houston, 114 U. S., 022; Wabash -vc. Kail way vs. Illinois, 118 U. S., 557.) The application of this doctrine to tn^ effect of State legislation upon the importation of alcoholic liquors into a State, came up for discussion and decision in Lei.?y vs. liardin, 135 U. S., 100. That case arose under the prohibition laws of Iowa. Section 1523 of the code of Iowa provided: '-No person shall manufacture or sell by himself, clerk or steward or agent, directly or indirectly, any intoxicating liquors except as hereinafter provided. And the keeping of intoxicating liquor with intent upon the part of the owner thereof or any person acting under his authority or by his permission to sell the same within this State, contrary to the provisions of this chapter, is hereby prohibited aad the intoxicating liquor so kept, together with the vessels in which it is contained, is declared a nuisance and shall be forfeited and dealt with as hereinafter provided." Chapter 71 of acts of 1SS2 of Iowa provided: "That after this act, takes elfec.. no person shall manufacture for sale, sell, keep .. _ v. ( ;or saie, give ci^uaugc, uu.m ui uiopense any intoxicating liquor for any person whatever, otherwise than is provided in this act. Persons holdiag permits as herein provided. shall be authorized to sell and dispense intoxicating liquors for pharmaceutical and medecinal purposes, and alcohol for specified, chemical purposes and wine for sacrimental purposes, but for no other pur poses wnatever. " The act then provides for the issue of permits for this purpose by the district court of the county, which permits hold good for one year. These provisions being in full force, Leisy & Co., brewers in Peoria, Illinois, shipped | into Iowa by rail to Keokuk, sundry barrels of beer in original packages, and sold and offered for sale in Keokuk, only in unbroken original packages this beer. Thereupon it was seized and held subject to the laws of Iowa above quoted. Tbe cause went up through the several State courts into the supreme court of the United States. By that court the case was held under deliberation and finally the opinion was pronounced by the chief justice as the organ of the court, The points to be decided are thus put: "That ardent spirits, distilled liquors, ale and beer are subjects of exchange, barter and traffic like any other commodity in which a right of traffic exists and are so recognized by the usage of the commercial world, the laws of congress and the decisions of the courts is not denied. Being thus articles of commerce, can a State in the absence of legislation on the part of congress prohibit their importation from abroad or from a sister State or vrhen imported prohibit their sales by the importer?" In answering these questions the court goes into a full and elaborate examination of all the authorities, the conclusion is expressed in these words: "Ihe plaintiffs in /MfivATic nf Tliinrna orp nnt. nhfl.rmfl. cists and have no permit" (the prerequisites of the Iowa act) "but import beer into Iowa which they sell in original packages. Under our ^decision in Bowman vs. Chicago, supra, they had the right to import the beer into chat State and in the view we have expressed they had the right to sell it, by which act alone it would become mingled in the common mass of property within the State. Up to that point of time we hold that in the absence of congressional permission to do so, the State had no power to interfere by seizure or any other action in prohibition of importation and sale by the foreign or non-resident importer.'' Upon the publication of this opinion, the consress recoznizinz its force, enacted the act of August 8th, 1S90, commonly known as the Wilson act. The act is in these words: "That all fermented, distilled or of intoxicating liquors or liquids, transported into any State or territory or remaining therein for use, consumption, sale or storage therein shall upon arrival in such State cr territory r>e subject to the operation and effect of the ia*" of such State or territory, enacted in tht .xercise of its police powers, to the same extent and in the same manner as though such liquids or liquors had been produced in such State or territory, ar<i shall not be exempt therefrom by reason of being introrViovoin in ortfrina! narOraorAS or Other ?wv~ ***** ? r ? wise." The case of Leisy vs. Hardin is discussed ia Piuruiy vs. Massachusetts, lo-5 U. S., 042, and ia Lveret vs. Missouri, 150 U. S., 1, in which case also the act of 1890 is mentionedThe controlling question in the case before us is: How does the Wilson act affect the . ^nntVi Pirnlinfi. In the rertent case of Scoti vs. Donald, 105 U. S.7 5S, a case from this circuit under the dispensary law, as it stood before the passage of the present act, the supreme court discuss the dispensary law, and condemned it. They hold that the Wilson act did not protect it. This case of Donald vs. Scott was brought because of the seizure and confiscation of certain alcoholic liquors, products of other States, imported by the plaintiff for his personal use. The conclusion of the supreme court, after full discussion of ail the cases bearing upon the question, is: "In the light of these cases the act of South Carolina, January 2, 18y5, (dispensary law,) must as to those of its provisions which affect the piaintiff in the present suits be condemned.'1105 U, S., 'J'J.) This act of IS95 was amended in IS'JO, and when this decision was published the law was further amended in 16'JT, and this case win turn t>a iaese amenumeuts. ilave the amendments cured the objectionable features in the act of IS'.'-j? In Donald vs. Scott, the supreme court say of the act of 1S95: "It is important to observe that the statute does not purport to prohibit either the importation, the manufacture, the sale or the use of intoxicating liquors. The hrst section does, indeed, mak? it penal to manufacture, sell, barter, deliver, store or keep in possession any spirituous, malt, vinous, fermented, brewed or other li'jtiors which contain aicohol and are used as a beverage, except as hereinafter provided, and declares all such liquors contraband. * Yet these enactments are not absolute, but are made subject to the subsequent provisions of the act. "When these provisions are examined we find that so far from the importation, manufacture and sale of such ii juors being prohibited, these operations are turned over to State functionaries by whom alone or under whose direction tbcy are carried on." The amending act of contains provisions almost identical iu language, exactly identical in eliect. The act of Ib'.'T amends section o of the act of 1S9-3] and still further amends sections 15 and 2;', which had been amended by the act of lv>yo, ? ~ 1I w: i'flOt. i ^LLiy VjLUIN, iiULLL LUCSC iOCi* iny JVVUVU^J iv?fc r tire? of discrimination. Bat these changes! in nowise meet the criticism of ;iie supreme' court of the act of 1805. This criticism was not on these discriminations only. The court says: "In view of these and similar provisions, it is indisputable that whatever else may be said of this act, it was not in. tended tc prohibit the manufacture, sale and use of alcoholic liquors. On the contrary, li-iuors and wines are recognized as commodities, -which may be lawfully maue, j bought and sola, and must, therefore, he deemed the subject of foreign and interstate commerce. Section 2 provides that the State board of control shall purchase all liquors for sale in this State. Section 3, after providing for the appointment of a commissioner, proscribes how he shall furnish liquors to tae county dispensers for sale. Section 7 provides for county dispensers who shall sell liquors. Section 13 provides for granting licenses to manufacture liquors. Section provides for a regular quarterly report from all licensed distillers. These sections m the act of 1S97 sustain the criticism of the su preme court, it is ciear mat oeiore me jjtate can forbid the importation and sale in original packages of alcoholic liquors, it must declare the manufacture, sale and use as a beverage of all alcoholic liquors to be contraband and forbidden, aud so take them out of the category of legitimate articles oi commerce. Stie cannot ior her own purposes treat these liquors as the subject of foreign and inters;ate commerce, and declares them not to be such to the rest of the world. The appalling statistics of misery, pauperism and crime which have their origiu and owe their existence to the use or abuse of alcoholic spirits, are the justification for po lice regulations with regard to tbern and teep then. under the control of the police power. Considerations of publicsafety, the supreme laws override every other, and measures, however drastic, which prevent the existence of this evil, will be sanctioned and enforced. But when the State herself for her own purposes furnishes to her citizens these alcoholic spirits, encourages them in their uie, puts them at convenient places within her territory for the supply and distribution ofituin, enters largely in th-s business, calculating the profit therefrom as aiding State, county j and municipal treasuries, regulations which j would properly be attributable to the police j power it' used in suppression of the trafiic,! assume the form of measures tendiug to support the State's monopoly in the business, act as restrictions upon commerce and infringes the Federal Constitution. If all alcoholic liquors, by whomsoever held, are declared con* -aband, they csase to belong to commerce and are within tie jurisdiction oi the police power. But so long as their manufacture, purchase or sale or their use as a beverage m any xorm or oy aay persim urc recognized, they belong to commerce, and are -without the domain of the police power. The act of 1S97, like the act of 1S9-3, is condemned on these principles. Neither of them are within exercise of the police power. Bat whilst it is true that some of the discriminating features a-e now removed from the dispensary, teaiares admitted to be fatal to its constituiionality, one at least still remains. The markets of this State are closed to the producers in other States. (Minnesota vs. Barber, 136 U. S-, 32'j.) They are closed, it is true, to the producers in this State. But the latter may be under the control of the laws of commerce with the State. Ktt tViA ir? X i-iC IViUiti aib L/iVlWfcV* KTJ wuv AUVV* K/~v-..~ commerce law. It is no justification that laws in conflict w: ' interstate commerce press equally on t^.- citizen and the stranger. (Minnesota vs. Barber.) A resident of the State may under the present dispensary law send his orders to a producer outside of the State for liquors for his own personal use and consumption and a limited importation within a restricted period and under an absolute condition | is allowed such resident. The producer isj limited to this. He cannot import his goods j into this State in any other way. The con-1 U.iLIUU. IV* OULU uuvivu vuw, J resident who desires to import liquor for his own personal use and consumption, shall arst certify to the chemist of the South Carolina college, the quantity and kind of liquor he wishes to purchase. Stating also that snch proposed purchaser will forward to Columbia, South Carolina, to said chemist, a sample of the liquor. On recei_ t of the sample the chemist immediately proceeds to test it and if found to be pure and free from any poisonous, hurtful or deleterious matter, ht- issiiRs a certificate to that effect, sivins names of proposed consignor and consignee and the quantity and kind of liquor to be imported, sends it free of expense and postpaid to tie consignor, and the liquor can he shipped within 00 days after me d. " the certificate, which can be used once o. v. it will be noted that the use of alcoholic liquors as a beverage is not prohibited, nor ia their importation for personal use forbidden, provided such beverages are free from "poisonous, hurtful and deleterious matter," other than the alcohol in them. Th?? o^f nmvirfpq*fh<> ftqsentin.1 and conclu sive test on this point, the certificate of the chemist of the South Carolina college. The act also declares all alcoholic liquors, not rested by the chemist of the South Carolina College and so found to be free "from poisonous, hurtful and deleterious matters," necessarily matters other than the alcoholic ingredients, to be of a detrimental character and their use and consumption to be against the morals, good health and safety of the Ofrs.tst HPUft* Jo tr\ OOTT -orithnnt OnV TPfrfUvl OUil/C. J>uab A J IV &<*J f TTAVUVMW whatever to their real character, the presence or absence of the certificate is the sole test. This can be sustained only on the fact that it is a valid inspection law. There can be no doubt that a State can enact laws protecting its citizens in the purchase of articles, imported or domestic, from purchasing something they did not intend to buy, or adulterated so as to threaten dis ease or death. (Plumly vs. .Massachusetts, 1-3-5 U. S., 401.) X5at it must be a law which protects or at least lends to protect the citizen. It must give him security: if it does not do so absolutely, still it must contribute to secure him. The mode of inspection in this act is by sample. Let it be supposed that the sam- j pie has been furnished, has been inspected, nas been approved and that the certificate has been sent to the consignor. What sort of asssurance does it give the citizen that this liquor he thereupon receives accords with, comes up to or in any wise resembles the sample? What protection does it give the citizen from fraud, from a failure to send iiuuor according to sample'.' None whatever, ft nnlv tmhipfrs him to the seizure and for feiture of his goods, if perchance they should j be insepcted. The fraudulent seller is out) of reach. Upon what then must the citizen j rely? lie can only rely upon the business character, standing and integrity of the I person from whom he buys, without any | regard whatever to the inspection. l'nis so-called inspection, furnishing no I security to the citizen, cannot thereby be! justified. It can operate only as a restric-j tion upon, hindrance and burden to his j acknowledged right to import for his personal use. It is thus an interference with j interstate commerce and in itself void. Tne language in Mugler vs. Kansas, 12:;, 1". 5>., 023, has some application here: "If a -srAfnte ruirnortinp- to have been enacted to protect the public health, the public morals the public safety, has no real or substantial relation to those objects, or is a palpable invasion of rights secured by the fundamental law, it is the duty of courts so to abr:dge them and thereby give effect to the Constitution." The same mode cf inspection by sample would seem to be used in all the liquors issued by the State commissioner. (22 stat utes. 541.) in Scott vs. Donald the supreme court discussing a similar feature lu the act, of JSy-3, says: "To empower a State chemist to pass upon what the law calls -the alcoholic puriity' of such importations by chemical analyses, can scarcely come within any definition of a reasonable inspection law." "If then [CONTINUED ON PAGE FOUR.J [ WADED IN BLOOD. NEGRO RAVI SHER LYNCHED IN UR3ANA. OHIO. I Fires on Mcl>. Kllllns:Tw^: VFound| lng Ten?Sliorill" Flees Towo, F cut lag Beiug Blown Up. Two raea were killed and ten wcuac'td by a company of ibe Ohio national guard at Urbana, O., at 2:30 Friday mornis*. The soldiers were attempting to s?ivs Charles Mitchell, the colored assailant of ilr&. Eliza Gr&umer, Iroai tae hands of aa infuriated mob, but tiieir etforls were unavailing. Mitchell was tiken from ihejaii at 7:30 Friday morning and hanged to a tree in the court yard. TT -> . i T TT.A ~ 'i'iie dcaa are: narvey .Den, uroana, shot in. the head, instantly killed; Upton Bak^r, farmer, north of UrbaHcl. Fatally mounded: Wesley Boweo, of Cable, shot, in ihe hip; Seach Wank, Urbana, shot in tae groin and leg. Less seriously vrounded: Dennis Graney, Urbana, right foot, 2light; Dr. Onarles Tnompson, Nor:h Lewisourg, head, slignt; S. a. Deaton, prosecuting attorney, leg, siight; G-us Weiser, Urbana, in tbe face, painful; Ray Dickerson, Urbana, siioalder, se. -J . T<-vkr-? M rtlT mA rtc,Y* i : L'J UO , C lyuu *u,wxvwr\.Aj A ca>/w, ; x^uu | arm, paialul; i-iain McOiure, urbana, j rigM arrc, pamtui. liis two previous sights ar.d Thute- j Jay portended tne graves: ,dauger, j duc no sucj. resales v/ere anticipated is thcsa wit bio. tae live hours irora i 2:30 to 7:3J Friday. Tlioss allied by j ?ft<3 militia were spccvi'.ors at the | scene of excitement. In audition to J ;hi? ?isr >r. is fttativd that Mr.-?. jOiiZH! cr-iumer, wa.) was uriaaiaally tisja a iced by tiie negro, will not recover, and se7eral of the injured are in a serious condition. Th^re is intense feeling Against sooae oi the oiliciais, and further complications are apprehended. While tne pis*, two nighus and daya? witnessed scenes of lawlessness and oloodshed, yet the feeling at no lime was so intense as it was Friday nigki. J?ne body of Mitchell was exposed all day in a rough ccllin and it intensified the feeling *mong the masses. The citizsns wno were iciiled were buried Sunday, and then- funeral will tend co Jieep alive tiie Ditter leoimg. Sev 5 eral ol tne wounded are crippled for I life. Friday one week ago Mrs. G-auoae? /ras criminally assaulted in daylight | at ner horae ia Uroana, near tue court | aouse- Mrs. Gauuier was prostrated, ihe I'elt tae disgrace and requested her 1 sou to announce tuat she w.-.s assault- . cQ for robbery. It was given out that JGLUcaeii attempLtu 10 lores nsr 10 sign a caeci for $500. 13 a; as Airs, daumer's condition became more serious trie facts became J?nown and also that ibe negro was atfecied witn a ioatiisome disease. Alucucli was hrsiaeid for roboery, but on Wednesday ae was arraigned for criminal assault. iLrs. G-aumer was uaabie to auppear m court and tbe hearing was iieid at aer nome. As Alitcheu entered ner ooi, she raised up in bsd and ex.wimed: "?ne brute:? nang him. t?ow dare you face me again, you crx ubt:. boon after the identification on Wednesday there was tali ox lynching. Crowds surrounded tiie jail that night and the snentf and local militia nad trouole in protecting tne prisoner. Inursday a grand jury -was impaneled and it suon returned aa ludiciment for criminal assault. Mitch ell, disguised in a soldier's uniform, was brougnt i'nursday mgnt irom jau into court. He waived tne redding ol | me indictment, pleaded guilty ana | was promptly sentenced to 20 years in tHe penitentiary, the limit ;or criminal iiSSdUlt. Xne trial was over before 8 o'clock Thursday nignt, when an attempt was made to lase Mitciieli to (Jolumous on me tram at iu p. m., out itit crowd were about me court nuuse ana jail, and when me carriage drove up i.n* ftfo.vd made a rasa iur liie laii. I [ Tile military drove tne peoples back. I out tue crowd soon increased in lury as well as number*;, so that tjJienri JicLsan and tne troops had ail tne,y could do to noid the jail, and tne trip co Ooiuoious was given Aup before tne departure o? tne las;t tram. It was 1:30 a. m. wnen the first attack was made on the jail. Tue soidiers opened fire c>n ttie mob ana volleys were poured into tne auvaucmg crowd, x.'wo were killed and ten wounded. The attaching party retired, out tne signt ol tci'3 dead and iujured i infuriated mem a.Lta, tnecrorru soon ! raiiitd. Tne hnal attack on the jail l was made ai 7 o'clock Friday inormag. [ i'ne lccal company, whiek did tut j snooting, had o-jen en duty for two eights, aad a reqUesl Was &e.ut to Gov. tfuannell lor rem I orcein en is. He ordered a company from Jdpringiieid 10 ine scene aad in?y arrived r-^;'cre 7o clock. Ma^or (ji-ar.zoii met tJDe sol diers and sent tneui tack to iQe depo:, ; aavmg tliat tney were not warned, i i'ne ic;cai company was also wim dravvn Iroin lut j*j aouut ilus lime, j Trie moo, vViiii?iU in nami oers ai me oreuii ui udy, seeing tne | >vay open, secured a large sledge namj nine auti. slarieti. lor me jail. JTne S fl?.earner was not needed, ?a cSherill 1 ildLsaii delivered tne ?e.ys> and Due | oro wo. soon ioiiati Mucaelis cell. A rope was tnrowu arouna me ne- j j gro's neok and ne was draggtd oui. j vv neu i-iic outer uuur was reaoneu tne noose slipped bus it was soon re j placed, ana tne condemned man was j nurned into liae jarU. Tne rope Whs j cneu tnrown over one of tne wines 01 ! a tree. jjcLilciieli was jerked up until nia ntad struck tnee ninb. ilis neci was broken, and ms body dropped to me grouna. 'i'lie lacts, as near as can be arrived at, are as I01I0WS: Wiien tne nrai attack was made on the jill at i:i$U a. in., u dozen men mounted tne rear steps and two oi f inem used sieage n&mrners cm tnt ! uoors. l'ne iocai militia company i was under arms on tue ins;ae witn i oner iff Mci-jaiu and ins depaties. "J&ptain (i. W. Leonard sieppc-i out d.iiu said: "'1 will give you three 1 uiinuiea to disptr^e. xl do not j ay so, i nrisi nre.:' | Tne crowd geaerally believed that1 | Sher:tit JM.cL.aiu had already ordered j me troops to nre, and tney aisp^ :\?ed. {iiixi tne atwek was renewed en | in<i rear ct<x>r ot me jail with skege j nan.msrs, the nrmg lock place, aud j me crowd uisptrrssu, leaving their 1 ata.ii and. wouLiuea. It was after 3 j o'clock when Sheriff ilcLain teleI ^rapned viuvernor Bushneli at Woosj ier, V? that a mob had &U*'.k2d tne ijaxi, iu.cn. iic; iiau uyc*ltu lite, mat iiAS iOrce was inadequate, and tnat assist[ ance was needeu at once. | The colored people are greatly exI cited over the affair. An hour or ji i z ? f more after the lynching Mitchell's | bedj was picked up and placed in a j rough cofliG, but still left under the j tree, where hundreds of people conj iinued to view it. Meantime crowds j of people poured into the city from | surrounding towns and viewed | the blood stained steps of the jail and | the marks of the bullets on the surrounding houses. U-ov. tfustmeJi arrived at uroana Friday night to investigate the trouble and especially the action of the troops. | Citizens asked fcr protection by troops for Sheriff McLsiitt, against whose life threats Had been freely made during the afternoon. Sheriff JIcLain left Urban a at S p. m. en route to Dayton. He escaped by the back door of the jail, and claims that dynamite was uein<r nrenarfKl tG blow him uo. Mitchell was 23 years old and a hotel porter. He bought milk at the dairy of Mrs. Gaumer, and knew site =7as alone while her children were at school, fie deliberately studied his opportunity for assaulting her. Thw Disj>9Daa?-y la the Senate. On last Wednesday Senator Tillman secured the adoption of the followiog resolution by the United States Senate: ' Whereas the Supreme Court of the United Stales declared in the cage o! Leisy vs. Hardin that no State had the right to prohibit the sale of liquor ivithin its own borders in original packages, upon the ground that it was in interference witia interstate commerce: and " Wnereas, in order to gire relief to the people of Iowa, Congress passed vvhac is known the TvViison law. (Wilson Isff is then qjoted.) ,k \Vhereas under the authority therein granted the Stale of Soutn Carolina, in December, 1S92, passed the dispensary law, under which provision is made for the sale of iiquor by j Siate officers, under strict restrictions J and rules; ani "Where under this system experi-J ence Gas shosvn the cause of temper- j ance has teen advanced ana me good order and quiet of the Slate have been promoted, inere being now less than 100 dispensaries in place of upwards of SOi) oarrooms in 1S92; and Whereas a Circuit Judge of the United States Court, by judicial iegis iation in a recent decision has repealed the Act of Congress above recited, as far as South Carolina is concerned, thus requiring the State to reopen oarrooms or alio?* the free and unlimited sales of liquor in original! packages: therefore, 03 it, "Resolved, That the judiciary com- | caitiee of the denate bo instructed to i consider what legislation, if any, is necessary to restore to Soutn Carolina the right granted by the Act of August 8, JLS9U, to control the sale of alcoholic liquors within its own borders, in its own way, in common with other States of this Union." Mr. Tillman spoke briefly in support of the resolution, spying the public impression that the dispensary law was a money-making device was erroneous, ana that it had accomplished much good in regulating the liquor*! traffic. Mr. Faulkner of West Virginia felt that the Senate should not be committed to the lengthy preamble reciting the etfect of tue law, etc. Mr. Tiilman modiried the preamble so as to avoid tne term "judicial legislation1' in characterizing the recent decision, and substituting "judicial interpretation." Mr. Hoar of Massachusetts, chair uia.il Ui. iu.e juuiuiaxjr uuiiiLLucucc, jjauposed a substitute, omitting all preamble and s:mp.>y directing the judiciary committee to consider anu report, by biil or otherwise, what legislation, if any, is necessary to carry oat tae statute of JLS9J relating to commerce oe^een the States. Air. Tillman accepted the substitute, and it was agreed to. (ireke Storm la Icxm, O-ie of the severest wind and rain storms prevailed throughout a good portion of North Texas that has been experienced in many years. The ,vhtat and oats crops are just about ""'A t ri fdu ro C< V?A G. V 1 J.JJZ/ aUX AJlO. Y UOllUg auu ^0 v*.lv< VA n pressed thai theae crops have been ureatiy damaged, though as jet it is impossible to estimate tna extent of injury done. At, Fort Worih the wind was * unusally severe in a portion of the city, dome twenty residences were oicwn from tneir foundations or otherwise damaged, besides injury being done to Darns, snsds ana small store ouiidingr. The area damaged in this city is half a mile by 2iiU 3>&rds and the damage is estimated at : not less than $15,UU0. At Arlington, 15 miles east of Jb'ort Worth, a Gozen jor more houses were blown olf their I iDiocks or unroofed, and a number of j houses on tne prairie for several miles [ground the town shared alike fate. ! I'ho -jnar.if.ft nf th? neaoe of the 'Ore ciuct, eS. A. Lasater, and L. J. Prose | I were in a tenement house which wasj i olov/n to atoms, both men being bad-I | ly hurt, the former, it is leared, fatal- j | ly. At Granci Prairie, four miles east | | of Arlington, six houses, including j 070 store ouadings were olotfii from j iheir foundations and badly damaged, j Prom Picaland, Weatberlord, Itasca, J fclnais, Wills Point, Mcixinley, Uran-f juaii, Oorsicaa, Gainesville, Ttrrell S jaadotner towns witnia a radius oI 170 milts come reports of heavy wind j a.aci lerriili^ down-pour o' raia, doing | more or less damage, especially to the inpeaing grain ana oiner growing [crops. At Mearne a hard rain anu j wiad storm aid considerable damage. | XDo Hildas tfili. Ine Tillman dispensary bill intrcduc- j j ed in taekkn&te at Wasaiagton March | i|> was reported favorably Friday by ] i tae interstate commerce comoaittee. j I it provider: "Xiiai all fermented, dis! tilled or otaer intoxicating liquors or. j liquids iranspjrieJ into any otate or | territory or rcmaiaiag therein for use, j cjasuKiuiion, sale or storage therein ! snail, upon arrival within the limits i of said otaie or territory, ne subject to ! the operation aad elftct of the laws of j such. btaie or territory to the same exteat and in me same manner as though jsucn liquors or lipids nad been proI duced m such Staie or territory, aad j snail not be exempt tnerefrona oy reason of being introduced therein in [ original packages for private use or otherwise, and such rftates shali Have | i absolute control of such liquors or j liquids within Uieir borders, by whomsoever produced and for whatever use importeu: provided. that nothing herein contaiutd shall oe construed as affecting the internal revenue laws of the United States or liquor :n transit.'' It is simply an extension of the 'origiaai pacKtge" biii of 1890 known ss *tne Wilson bill," and little or no opit-o o.iviir n-ictoffo ic onnrp ? Lv/ i>I/O MCAOOWiCj w a?s? w jnencied. ' THE SUGAR SCANDAL. SENATOR TILLMAN PUSHING HIS PROPOSED INVESTIGATION. ai ou*. vcw cv *.VRW K"V Sense of the Senate as to an Investigation o? the Records ot Senators. Senator Tillman gave the United Spates Senate another hour of exciting controversy over the proposed sugar investigation J2st Thursday. Senator Tillman then cams forward with another phase of the proposed sugar investigation, closing" with a motion to discharge the committee on contin gent expenses from farther consideration of the resolution recently offered by him to investigate the alleged speculation in sugar stocks. The motion contemplated an immediate vote by the senate on the sugar investigation resolution. Mr. Tillman spoke in his usual vehement style, which attracted much attention and drew crowds to the galleries. He began by presenting a clipping from a Haverhill (Ds. BL.) newspaper, referring to the recent speech of Mr. Tillman and adding a query as to whether i the proposed sugar inquiry would be j suoplemented by an inquiry into the J r> J. T> _ *.1 ^ ~ ? I cnarges 01 ex-oenaior .ouuer in connection with Mr. Tillman's administration of the South Carolina dispen-1 sary law. The charges against him were stale, | M>. Tillman said. He had met them before and he read an open ietter writ- j ten to the people of Sjuth Carolina, characterizing the charges as slanders. Tiiis was an attempt to divert attention from the sugar scandal, tha senator declared, but fthe attempt would fail. He had com9 from the plough to the governorship of South Caroli??. AwflM 4-Vi c. ^AnrvlC ^ thrteD I LLCLy V wi iVlLUO \J?* ?UVdW constituting the oid regime,and it had won him many enemies. Ail the crimes in the decalogue had been charged again 1 him. He had appealed to his peo.Me and they had sustained him, sending him to the Senate after a heated canvass in which Mr. Sutler had sought to ufiy blow''his (Tillman's) character. Now the same old eggs were Drought forward. If any man desired to look into his character, then, said Mr. Tillman, he courted the fullest inquiry. And any other Senator against whom there was the breath of scandal.should nave the chargss probed to the bottom and this scandal dispelled. He had made no charges against the Senator from New Jersey (Sr. Smith,) he declared, but had merely submitted the published charges now before the public, and, since the committee had made no reports on the resolution, Mr. Tillman said he would now move to discharge the committee from further consideration of the resolution. "So that," he added, with rising inflection, "Senators can now put them- j selves on record as to whether they j want these charges investigated." Mr. Tillman dropped into his chair, but was qiickly on his feet again. He had, he said, approached the chairman, (Jones of Nevada) of the committee on contingent expenses and nad been told by him ttiat he was ready to report the resolution, but was awaiting the action of the other two members of the committee (Jones of Arkansas and Gaiiinger of New ilampshire.) Mr. Gallinger then secured recognition for a statement of the attitude of the committee, he berns the senior member in the absence of tne chairman, Mr. Jones of Nevada. "Erery man in pubiic life feels the sting of false charges," he said, "and must the Senate pause every time such accusations are brought to spend its time and the money of the United States in pursuing these charges. It this is to oe the case, then there would never oe a tariff bill nor any other bill." Mr. Vest suggested that there was a precedent for ignoring charges against 1 the parsonal character of a Senator, ile referred to tne attitude of Senator Thurmond when an investigation was proposed against one of his associates, tie nad held that the courts were open ~ - o v-i A 1 if -rrro o y At iUr priVittC icuic?,auu ?uai> ~i< tiiw uut for the Senate to undertake to right a private wrong. There had been no dissenting voice from this position, Mr. Vest asserted, and it was not for one Senate to pat aside its public business to attend to tbe private character of Senators. Mr. Tillman was again on his feet. The newspapers were trying to make, a tire in His rear, lie said, while he wus engaged in a fire in .front. His resolution simply sought to deter mine whether tne finance committee was the creature of the sugar trust, whether senators were the "tools and paid agents of the sugar trust," or whether they were here performing their duties as honorable men. Mr. G-aliinger proceeding, said the! people of edcn senator's Stale must jMiss upon his character. The people of South Carolina had passed on ttie character of trie senator from South Carolina, and that was sufficient Yin dication wit bout an appeal to me senate. "Can Senator Aldrich and the committee deny a hearing," queried Mr. Tillman, "wiien the piper making ttie enarge orrered to appear and prove the charge?' Mr. G-allinger said this investigation of charges might go on indefinitely. Suppose another paper made another charge. Must the senate start an investigation ol tne enarge and then suppose other charges wera made. Most further investigations be started. Was that the kind of business tne senate must embarfc upon instead of attending to pressing legislation. Mr. Tillman was still standing at his desk, and hurled back the answer: *ff tnese charges are false, then it is time to stop the lies spread before the public, this slander of ink, and to punish the men gujlty of the false~ ^-1 - ? i /-\ c?r\ TfAti c t o Ti UUUU . auu U.LLC1 1 JVU U.V ou jvu CWMXXU convicted before the American people." The time had not arrived, Mr. Galiinger proceeded calmly, when the American press was to be muzzled in the manner suggested by the senator from South Carolina. The era of the Spanish inquisition had gone b r, and the men of the press, zealous in their duties, were not to be dealt with by such methodsMr. Gailinger closed with an earnest protest against "railroading" the reso iution out 01 me comiautse xu ueuance of precedent and the usual courtesy prevailing. "I desire to call your attention," again interjected Mr. liliman, "to the fact mat your side is railroading through a tariff bill, and as soon as it is passed you propose to adjourn, so tuat if there is to oe any sugar investigation it is time to bsging it at once." Mr. Galliager was Jed into further reply. He referred to the futility of investigations and ibe humiliation to which senators were subjected in being brought before the former sugar investigation. He again protested! fl/veincf TfrVi7/?)i rw/vn 1/3 .***?. vAv^AMWkN,/ the committee navicg charge ot trie resolution. At this stage an exciting colloquy occured which appeared to involve a question of veracity. Mr. Tillman interrupted to state that he had it from tie chairman of the committee (Jones of Nevada) that he was readv at any ti ne to report the resolution back. Mr. Gallinger said such an assertion could not be correct, as the committee had met on the day of the alleged statement by the chairman, and had not reached a determination. "The chairman told me that he was ready to report," insisted Mr. Tillman. Here Mr. Jones of Arkansas, the Vi^Y? rvn anr* Kza>? /"\ F o /?/*Nrri rYl 1 ftAO 0>?AC0 VlUOl JJLLtji-U 1/^1 V L LU<^ LLiUJ.iH.'vO, m VJV and in positive tones declared: "The ehsirmsn could not have made suck a statement, as it was not so." "But he did make it," again asserted Mr. Tillman. "Then let him make it here," demanded Mr. Jones. The senators were facing each other, and the exchange was direct ana perA 1 u fpp I nAt/s ViA /J (-irtAVl b'jliK.1. iiir. xiiiinau. saiu. nc iiau acc-u. that the Republican senators had "caucussed at a dinner, and had deciden not to support this investigation. Was this another lie? Democratic senators, also, were said to be opposed to investigation, "But," he added, turning to associates, "if there is rascality we ought to kno v it. It lays wi:h you, by your votes to be relieved o; the charges before the American people." Mr. Jones of Arkansas, of the com[ mittee, gave assurance that theresolui tion would be resorted in due time un less taken a-ray from, the committee. 'Bat aside from this," pro*eeded Mr. Jones, ';I cannot shut my eyes to ! facts connected with this. I believe the senate of the United States is an honorable body. I believe senators are gentlemen?as a rule. There was suppressed laughter at this qualification. Here Mr. Hoar of Massachusetts de* <nandftd a vote on the motion and Mr. G-allinger moved to lay the motion on the table. Mr. Tillman again arose. In view of the fact that two members of the committee had give a assurance that the resolution would be reported, ae would, ne said, withdraw the mocioo so that senators could vote on the main question, whea presented without complications as to committee procedure. This closed the iacideat and the tariff bill was taken up. Fire at t^ie Asylum, mi-- i J? iuo iauuur,y uunwu^ai wcuu^iuti for the insane was gutted by fire this morning. In the northwest corner of the buiiding was a stove where irons were heated. The roof over this stove caught fire and the blaze quickly spread. It was a long run for the engines, and when they arrived the fire had gained good headway. The -fire ?vas confined to the building, which, with its contents, were destroyed. The loss will foot up several thousand dollars, and is covered by insurance. The patients were greatly excited by the tire and noise. A serious riot seemed imminent for awhile. Chief May was j interfered with by a negro employed by the hospital, when Chief May pushed the negro aside, the negro cursed him and struck Mm 011 the face with a brick and several others commenced shying oricks at him. A policeman arrested the negro, clapped handcuffs on him and started off. Others tried to release the negro and trouble was imminent A number of pistols were drawn and things looked serious. Chief May is greatly beloved by the firemen and they were bitter agaiast the man who struck him. I r. Bibcock succeeded in quieting maimers. He secured the release of the negro, promising to deliver him to the nffip.srs of the law whenever he "was wanted. Then the boys put their whole attention to fighting fire. Serious charges will bs preferred against the negro. After the fire, Abraham Jdoore and William Mack, both colored, were both arrested for participating in tne fight. What are Original Packages. Judge Simonton does not appear to have giuch helped those who want to sell liquor in competition with the State. Dispensary Commissioner I YT TTT- J UaJ 4.U v auce vv euuesuay tcicgrsxyucu internal revenue department at Washington inquiring what were considered "original packages" within the meaning of the Wilson law. He received the following reply: "All packages containing distilled spirits required to be marked, branded and stamped under internal reveaue laws are regarded as original! packages. G. W. Wilson, "Acting Commissioner." That appears to settle the matter. If private parties wish to seil half pints, pints, quarts or gallons, each half pint, pint, quart or gallon must be imported in a separate branded and stamped package. Of course there will be no proht m that business.? Columbia Record. Made TUlman No Promise. Senator Jones, of Nevada, chairman of the senate committee on contingent expenses, returned to Washington Friday. Referring to the Tillman resolution to investigate the reports that senators nave speculated in sugar stocks, he said that the committee would take the question up in good time, but that so far as he was concerned he would not be hurried into reoortin? uoon a matter of so much importance as is this. He declined to discuss Senator Tillman's reference to their interview over the question of reporting the resolution beyond saying when Mr. Tillman came to see him, he had simply told him that he wouid take it up with his colleagues of the committee as soon as he could t-rtnothoi' qc Vie h?ir^ not nrirtT* faVgVUUVA MU MV - ^r..v. to that time been able to do. The senator contends that there has been no undue delay and that there will be none. Stnnned by an Electric Wire. A special dispatch from Anderson te the Columbia State says the electric wirA was broksn on McDuiSe street, and Kev. S. B. Brown got into it in the dark and was badly burned. R. T. Long, an employe of the power company, was near by and ran to his relief, but he also got noid of a live wira and was thrown on his back. His cries brought C. S.Sullivan to his assistance, who threw a rope to him and thus Dulled him out. He was also i severely burnd. STATE WILL COMPETE FOR TH? LIQUOR BUSINESS ki SOUTH CAROLINA. Seems to be I5ie Plan?CoMtabnlarv Will Likely bo Abolished?Wbat Attorney General Says?Board af Control. Of course nothing else is being talked of in official, political and other circles at the State capital just aj; present, but the decision of Judge Simonton in the matter of the dispensary law. Everybody hereabouts is specu1-2.! X- 1. A.T. ~ :i) laung as to wnai course me oiaie wm pursue. Tuesday the State officials seemed to have somewhat recovered from the first severe shock arid appeared to have considered the situation calmly pvernight They were therefore income what better condition to talk of the situation Tuesday than they were the preceding day. From what could be gathered after hearing all suggestions made it seems practically settled that the policy of the State will be about as follows: An appeal from Judge Simonton's decision will be made, but it is extremely unlikely that any effort will be made towards having the judge vacate his order of injunction pending that aprujol .Tnrlo? Sim/vrifrtn rmilH hftrdlv .be expected to grant suck a request inasmuch as his decision is so sweeping in its character ana so unqualified in its terms. In the meantime it seems to be the general purpose to continue the operation of tne dispensaries, putting down the prices of the liquor to the lowest possible figure and entering the field of competition with the whiskey houses outside the State who /irtYl sMtl-rr c?Vi4r* T^Q/>lr3flfOC frtr v9U (t/lilj 1U VligmaA AVA sale. It is contended that the dispensary can meet all competition successfully because it can reduce expenses considerably and besides the profits at present are about 100 per cent. This can be cut down very easily and there is plenty of margin. The first big lopping off of expenses, it is understood, will be the doing away with the constabulary force. This now costs the State between $40,000 and $50,000 annually. It is ascertained that already Governor Ellerbe has issued instructions to all the constables to cease all seizures and ordered the chief constables to report in Columbia Wednesday for council with him. In lieu of the constabulary, it is said, the several cities of the State will be notified that "? " "? J 1 1 - L JL XT tney will 06 expeciea w instruct tneir police forces to look out for all sales of liquors in other than original packages. It is broadly intimated, but not from the governor, that in case this is not done the metropolitan police law will be applied to the city that fails to do so. It is also contended that the dispensary will have an advantage over all competitors in that it will be able to purchase whiskey in balk and bottle it, while all others will be obliged to make their purchases in original packages, belt able to sell only in sach. Anothp: contention is that outside parties cannot purchase, say 100 half pints' original packages in one box and selltnem separately, but must sell the box and its contents. Wnat there is in either of these positions remains to be seen. It is practically settled that there will be no extra session of the general assembly. It is held that this will be a great and useless expense. It is held that in case the legislature goes to Columbia now it will be totally unprepared to pass any kind of an act to relieve the situation, and what is more each man will have his own ideas about it, and the result will be that about six -weeks will be consumed in debate at a very heavy cost to the State. Governor Ellberbe was a little noncommittal Tuesday. He seemed to have made up his mind, having recovered from the shock of tve precedI ing day. He stated to a representative ! of The State that Wednesday he would make a brief statement covering the attitude of the State va regard to the present situation. ^ f j governor iiiueroe lias conierrea wiwi the members of his cabinet and with, the attorney general and has also conferred with tne members of the State board of controL Attorney General Barber returned to the city Tuesday at 1 o'clock. He was seen shortly afterwards by several representatives of the press to whom he made the following statement: "I don't know what coarse the gov rrrill toikiia Sn far fl<J thfi \ttra. Ol U VA T? 1AA Jk/bUUUV? MV W? - aspect of tlae case is concerned, you may say that this office has not determined at this early hour after the rendition of the judgment just what steps will ba taken. This is a temporary order of injunction and unaer the United States statute an appeal from it may be taken to the circuit court of appeals. This course may be adopted. In the meantime the answer of the defendants will be filed on or before next Monday as required by the subpoena and if a final order can be had at a sufficiently early date it is possible that we may wait for that and if if ic offoinot tic to Ire an armmil from it J. U AO O^tUUd W WMM.V MA4 wprj- ..... directly to the supremecourt of the United. States. In any event it seems to me that the question involved will finally have to De decided by the supreme court." ''How about the running of the dispensary and the sales of liquor in the meantime?" "Well, as to the running of the dispensary that is for the Stats board of control to say, and as to the seizure of liquors that is a matter for the gov ernor, but of course I presume ills excellency will strictly obey the order of the court. And I have never advised the disregarding of any judgment and would not advise any such thing in this case." Mr. Barber, continuing, said that he could only speak of the legal aspect of the situation. The State dispensary is going ahead shipping out iarge orders of liquors. Democratic Gain In Missouri. Returns from the first Missouai congressional district indicate that Lloyd I(Dem.) is elected over Clark (Rep.) by a plurality of 5,000. The total vote cast was about 80 per cent, of that cast last jNoveme>er. j^ioya cameu Hannibal, Clark's home, by 241 plurality, a Democratic gain ol 206 cvei the November election. His First Yose. Senator McLaurin's first vote in the Senate was in favor of the Democratic amendment to reduce the duties on crockery ware from 60 and 55 cents to 30 and 35 cents. His votes today show that he is noi a protectionist, aithou'ga he favors protection to raw material as a means of relief to the farmers and producers.