Seattle daily post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1886-01-10

COMMUNICATED

,,, declares that certain members
a ,ancil Of the Legislative As
- ~, intsud 70 vote against the Local
oSs,o5 | Bill passed oy the House. IL IL
vss,biy 80 true. / feel like asking, "oy.
80 against the Local Option Bill
,-.,;sS ths, the principle Of local option
ilp.s,ded As xroue; or thst the result
- lay would not be best for the
- sIs. -. ., that toe Legislator ID disposed
ps,ntain the liquor traaio iust be
- ~ wants to, regardless of conse-
o..S sad ethics. Ia regard to the
-, traffic, one of three things must
y srusidered best-prohioitioB license
fr.e ssle. The Local Option Bill
" s..nosss 20 let the msisrrty Of the peo-
- a ,ks several precincts dscide for
,s.znselyss which they pfefer. lss
Ts.tdstos Who votes against the Local
ars;,o Bill denies them that right. On
80 oriuciplef Republican, Demo
...,iss II neither of thes-. then 1t
80, he on aristocrstic or autocrstic.
Pat ne cannot suppose that any man In
-, legislative halls having taken the
o~th Of Office desires OF proposes an
.,.oer.ey. TheE he who votes NO"
- ~ Local Option bill must be in favor
a An arissocrscy, who propose 10 buy
sn6 ssil. ss beverage, aicJheiic liquors,
vsetbsr the majority Of the people are
villine or not, meastine tue people tnr-
aishine policemen and courts to AID IN
nskine the "business" res. eotabie.
Possibly some enc may ssome that
mosibitiou Vt the liquor trafhc 10 un-
,naitsfional. Bat IN ell csses vht re
sb,s has been tested the Supreme Court
ssve decided In favor Of the prohibitory
hv. sAs q nieasare of police rsRula-
tiou. looking 10 the preservation Of pub
N norals, a State Law prohibiting the
usnufaeture and sale of intoxIcafing
hocors Ia NOT repaRnant 20 any classs
al the Constitution Of the United
sts,ss." See decision OF tbs Supreme
Coars of the United States 10 she case
Of Beer Co. versus Mass, 81 Otto, p. S.
aThe right TO sell Intoxicating liquors,
20 far a. soch a right exists, IL not one
Of the rights growing out Of citizenship
Of The Unitsd States"
aTbe weight Of authority 10 over
vbelminQ that no s7ch imman.ty has
heretofore exist d as would prevent
S,sse Legislatures from regulating and
ssen prohibiting the traffic il intoxieat-
iaR drinks" See decision by the So
pssne Court of the United States IN
bsrtsmsyer versus Iowa, Is Wallace,
page i8.
Thss the Territorial Legislature pos
sssses a. ample powers as State Leeis
lsturs In reference 10 this subject Is we'll
kuosn. "The legislative power Of every
Territory shall extend to ali rightful
subjects Of legislation not inconsistent
vita the Constitution aud laws of the
Upitsd States Sss revised statutes Of
the United States, section 1851.
Is not the legislator who opposes the
local option DILL rebel against the kew
stone principle Of our government 2
He Who records bis vote against local
option vii secare for himself a lasting
plsee 10 the memory of the best people
Of our Territory. He will be damned
to everlasting fame" Tbs people will
remember bin. especially when there 10
to be an eIsctisn OF true and tried men
TO places Of honorable trust. They will
take care that be IL suitably rewarded.
He will be left alone 10 his glory. q.