Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1886-06-25
The Local Option Law.
Miss Narcissa Z. White Answers Some
Obi .clions to II.
Published by request of the Thurston
Countv Vo'ers' League.

| As some persons seem TO be laboring
under vcry mistaken ideas concerning the
Local Option law, permit me 10 state a
few facts concerning it. In the first place
the charge has been made that the Local
Option bill was a" trap" concocted by
men--nOf for the purpose OF securing tenn
perance legislation, tut i'll order d" 10 defeat
Woman Sutfra &C." that also the Liquor
Dealers had said "Give the women rope
enough 10 hang themselves and the H.
ference is given tilat for that reason, 4" the
Local Option bill went through by unan-
imous vote i'll the house and only three
opposing votes in the senate" But in
answer TO the last statements, need only
call the attention of anyone in West Wash.
Ter, if il is not well known fact that the
most bitter fight against the passage of the
Local option bill WAS made by the united
siren. til of the Liquor Dealers, not only in
Wash. Ter, but of the whole Pacific coast.
That even after the bill had passed the
legislature, these Liquor Dealers did
not give UP the contest, but for five days
moved Heaven aud earth" to get the
Governor to veto the bill. That certainly
does not look as if the Liquor Dealers
had said, let the bill pass" Give these
women rope enough aud they will hang
themselves" No, the passage Of the LO.
cal Option bill was in answer to the petit
tions OF thousands Of citizens all over this
Territory-warm friends of woman's suf-
frage and of the temperance cause. The
bill was written by Hon. VIM. White
United States District Attorney, and be-
fore it was presented to the legislature at
all, was submitted to the legal opinion of
six of the best lawyers of the legislature,
three of them were eX-Judges Of the
Supreme Courl-all Of them ardent friends
of Woman's Suffrage, who, each voted
solidly in the last Legislature against the
attempt To even relieve women OF jury duty
Their opinions were unanimously i'll favor
of the bill and its constitutiOndity. But
to make assurance doubly sure, | myself,
before the bill came before the legislature,
Supreme Court. His reply in regard to
the Local Option bill was that after ex
amining it, he found no flaw in it, and
believed it to be entirely constitutional"
Moreover. every State in this Union, with
the exception of California, has within the
these last few years declared by the Su-
preme Court, that law submitting to the
vote Of the people, and a" LEGAL Option
Law" is constitutional. The assertion
therefore, that the Local Option bill Was
a trap" for Woman's Suffrage is not only
utterly absurd, but also utterly without
foundation. While the claim that the law
is unconstitutional cannot be sustained for
a moment by any one thoroughly familiar
with Territorial and National laws.
In regard to the statement concerning
the druggist law-viz: That it is " hOle''
in the law amounting virtually "to free
liquor" as ANY druggist can sell, and
any person can buy liquors on the plea
that it is for Sacramento, Medicinal or
Scientific purposes, and then drink such
liquor as beverage" such statement is
simply a gross misrepresentation of the
law. In the first place, the law explicitly
states that aHy druggist selling liquor or
disposing of it for any other purpose than
for mechanical, scientific medicinal or
sacramental purposes" or selling or dis
posing for sacramental, scientific" &c,
purposes in any other manner than that
prescribed by the law, that the druggist
shall be fined from $50 to $500 for such
offense, or be imprisoned six months in
the county jail" and also that the druggist
, under penalty shall be required to keep a
J correct account of all sales of intoxicating
liquors by him and on order OF the court
produce his record for inspection. And
that the matter Of whether druggists are SELL
ing liquors as q beverage, or in any way Ufo
lating the law, shall be given in special
charge" for investigation "by the Grand
; Jury at each term of court" Could any
law be more strict, SO far as druggists are
concerned
But can persons "buy liquors of drug.
gist, for sacramental,' mechanical, scien.
tific or medicinal purposes, and then
drink such liquors rs beverage The
L. :,~ snst H.: int W
person can buy liquors as q medicine
Except on prescription of a physician
lawfully practicing his profession in that
county," and this prescription "must SCI
forth the particular purpose for which the
7 liquor is required, and that " it Is not in
tended as beverage or to be sold or given
away ;"-giving the name of the patient
} and signed by the name Of physician, and
"Only one delivery and sale can be made
on one prescription" And if any doctor
, shall falsely grant prescription he shall
, he liable to fine Of from $50 to $500
and Imprisonment.
To obtain liquors "for sacramento
mechanical or scientific purposes, the per
! son buying must give written or printed
statement signed by himself, stating that
3 the liquor so purchased is to be used sOlel,
I for sacramento, mechanical or scientific
purposes" This statement must be KEEP
by the druggist for year." open TO in
. spectiCn OF the court when required, AND
if it found that any of the liquor so OF
, tanned has been used by the buyer as
: beverage the man purchasing the liquor
. and making this false statement to thu
I druggist, can be indicted and fined from
{ $50 to $780, or imprisoned six months
The Grand Jury at each term Of court i!
also required to make investigation in re
: gard to this.
AS regards the payment OF liquor
dealers losses under the prohibition law
let me say ia the first place that liquor
. dealers property is not confiscated" By
the adoption OF prohibition. The law
does not touch his building. does not touch
, his furniture, does not even touch his stock
of liquors on hand. 1t simply says he ear
no longer make or sell liquor in WASH Ter.
? but he may ship his stock of liquors on
hand to Idaho or California, or any State
> 80 unfortunate as to retain the liquor sys
} tenn, and he may sell it there. He may
turn his " Brewery" intOa fruit cannery,'
, or boys college, if he chooses to do so.
But could have more sympathy with
y this compensation cry if it was no
manifestly so insincere. Because if it is
80 unjust not to compensate the liquo,
dealers for their losses, why do not thes.
same people urge that the liquor deale,
first compensate all the wires and children
, Of Wash. Ter, who have suffered losses
OF home and farm and the barest necessitie.
of life, on account of the liquor trade
Surely these unoffending ones, who pos
sibly never drank a drop of liquor in theil
life-wives who have worked hard to get 6
little home, and then helplessly have seer
all swept away into the liquor dealers till
} deserve compensation for this cruel loss
before liquor dealers can with the sli ghtes
show of justice ask for compensation O
. the mere depreciation in the money max
. ing capacity of their property. And now
men and women of Wash. Ter, pleac
. with you by the love you bear your home
and your God, cast your vote on the 2Sth
. day of June against the saloon. There i.
= not saloon in Wash. Ter, to-day that /.
not built on the ruins of some woman.
home. There is not rose on the liquor
dealers bonnet. that has not cost the rost
of some Of other woman's cheek. Ths
question is simply between the home ant
) the saloon, which will you have, ,rhich viii