The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-07-23
LETTERS FROM THE PEOPLE.


The Constitutionality of Local-Option Law.
To the Editor Of the indianapolis Journal:
Local option seems to be in the air just now
| and the people are coming quietly to the conclu
| sion that had they chance to vote upon the
questions of saloon or no saloon it would resuls
IN no saloon in more than fifty counties in the
State Of Indiana. We also hear that such law
| would be constitutional and would be so held BY
the court OF last resort in this State. Reader,
Will you follow me In short review OF this cues,
ton OF the constitutionality Of local option
| lawF Let US look through the cid laws on this
subject, as we'll as the Supreme Courts decisions
| thereon before rush into local option In
| 1858 the Legislature passed act providing
that sno person shall retail spirituous LIQUORS ex
| cept for mechanical. saeramental, medical OF
| culinary purposes, without the consent Of a ma
jority of the legal voters of the proper township
| who may cast their vote for license at the April
election Laws of 1853, page 81 nave quoted
the section which gives the township the right
| to say if there shall be license license, sa
loon or no saloon. Very shortly after its passage
the constitutonality of this law came before the
Supreme Court of Indiana in the case OF Maize
VS.. State. Ind, 342, and the court held that 80
much of the act as related to the vote OF the
township was unconstitutional. The court Ia
the case cited says
"If the townships vote diversely as it is IN.
derstood they have, then in practical operation
1t Is q local law" I'D, $40
In 1873 there was passed another law which al
lowed majority of the voters of ward or
township 90 sign the petition of the applicant for
license, End said petition to be filed with the
county auditor, and the County Commissioners
granted the license. This latter law came be-
fore our Supreme Court in the case of Gfoscn
VS.. The State, (42 Ind, 547.l Counsel commended
that Maize vs. The State was the law OF Indi
ana, and that it applied to Groesch VS.. State;
but notice what the court says on this point, be-
cause there seems to be a misunderstanding al
TO whether the latter case in the AID Indiana,
does not override the in the 4th Indi-
ana The court says: 'Tne case OF Maize
vs. State is cited as an authority in support
of all the objections urged against this law. We
do not so regard it. In our opinion, the act. the
constitutiorality of which was in question in-
that case, was so different from the act now in
question that that case is not an authority upon
any point in this case AZ Ind, sos.
Again. in the 423 Indiana case--the last one on
this question-and the one which some think over
rules Maize vs. State, says: Had the question
been submitted to the people to determine, by
vote or petition, whether the law should take eff
feet not or the time when it should take ef-
feet, there would have been some grounds for
the objection'-that is, some objections to its
constitutioDalty.
The points made in the 4th Indiana on consti-
tutional law as applied to the power of the Leg
islature have been again and again cited with
approval by our Supreme Court
In the State of Iowa this same question Of To-
cal option came before the court, and it was
said The proposition seems to us too clear to
admit of any doubt that the act of Jan. 20, 1857,
receives its vitality and force from the vote OF
the people, and the law is unconstitutional and
void" IS Ia, 494 In the SD Iowa the same
question came before the courtin a different form,
but was decided the same way.
You must bear in mind that the Constitution
of Indiana provides that where a general law
can be made applicable all laws shall be general
and of uniform operation throughout the State.'
(Sec. 1l9)
1t must not be forgotten that the law as it now
stands is such that local option could not be held
constitutional without overriding Maize The
State and that the court would not unde' the
great pressure of powerful legal counsel, az veil
as decisions of other courts 'in point be cry
likely to overturu the cases which have oeen
held good law for so many years.
INDIANAPOLIS. GEO. w. HUNTER