The Magnolia gazette. [volume] (Magnolia, Miss.) 1872-current, 1888-03-31
NO LEGAL SALOON IN PIKE.

The above Is rather a startling
announcement to the quid nuncs.
but it is not less startling than
true.
Any kind of title will stand
till 1t is contested, and any kind
of a marriage will do till it is
placed under the calcium lights
of the law.
The local option law did not
repeal any old law governing the
sale. 1t added few restrictions,
drew up penalties little stronger
and enabled people to vote by
counties on the matter Of the
sale.
Ordinarily saloons have about
the legal permanence of ten pins.
Ihese stand admirably we'll till
the balls get in motion; so with
the saloons, the legislature has so
hcdged and fenced them round
with requirements that they when
attacked at law go over like ten
pins.
The Sentinel after our election,
asserted that the Probs. had cary
ed an easier Jordan for the sale
to travel, than it had previously
enjoyed. The result did not
rebound much to the credit of
that paper as a prophet, in fact
prophecy is about the only thing
the Sentinel can be said to be Il
failure at.
A very short time after the
election the injunction wave reach
ed our county and IN six cases of
saloon attacks it destroyed them
every one. The last one against
MIR. Forcish was sustained be-
cause he had not gwen pu oIication
and although lawyers argued that
the new law did not require pub
llcatlon still the coult seemed to
think differently.
All the requir cmen.s found in
the Code of 1880 arc still in force.
Not only does the local option law
not repeal one of these; but 1t
positively asse is that the Code of
1880 shall govern and control IN
the issuance of licenses. Conse-
quontly the old majority retition
is still in force; The publication
notice is in force; the require
nrnt not to sell 10 minors, not to
sell on the Sabbath, not to open
on election days, none of which
are specified in the local option
law, yet are all in full force aud
,iIlue.
The twenty-five ficeholder
clause Is not and cannot be a
suppression Of tie old majority
prtition. 1t Is only Il require
ment OF recommendation, GER
titicaie of character, TO guard tie
authorities against putting the
license INTO bad hands. The
makers of the local option law
were not in their seats to smooth
down the rugged road, that lies
before the rum seller. They were
MT making way passabic, by
which he could sail along into a
full license on f,wcry beds of
ease. They gave him stlffer
penalty, added the additional pro-
tecticn of recommendation uf
20 real estate holders, and then
left the whole Code OF 1880, with
its alnrndatory laws all open and
in full operation before him.
If the Code of 1880 W.. re sus-
pended by the local option law,
then you cou'd not close saloon
on the Sabbath, nor on election
day, nor prosecute for selling to
either minors or intoxicated pet
pie. The.only penalties mention
ed in the Local Option Act, arc
Nero additional penalties for in
fracting the law of sale, while all
the old n achinery of procuring
license ETC.. is left just where It
was, consequently the saloon that
has put on file no majority petit
tion, is not in the legal pathway
out by law, and Is liable
under all the forms OF law.
That understanding of the law
that substitutes by implication
the twenty-five man clause for the
old one could NOT be at all con-
stitntional. Under the modern
meaning it should no~ be in the
Governors pocket like the one
to protect Lea College, which
was passed almost by tho unau-
nous consent of both heuscs But
which is said to be carried round
unapproved by Gov. Lowry as d
pocket emblem of his democracy.
The idea that u license to retail
can be procured BY or on the
recommendation of twenty-five
neu, is at variance with our very