Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1895-03-16

article. II certainly looks AZ n men.
ton was made " it that q,
might have some wei ht with
the delegates 10 the O. institution.
al Convention from the "ufal
Districts" Il 10 10 be hoped that the
| fact IL not sufficiently rundefuus to in
duce them TO lot contrary 10 the under.
| stood wishes OF ihrif constituents on
the subject q submitting 90 the people
/ the gu siion VI prohibition.
How d0 the people Of tho "fural die
/ tflot" aud their delegates relish the
new doctrine, feot nty promulgated
! through the pfest-that they eau have
nothing to do with the regulation Of
nslis In tho larger municipalities Of
Tue State, wnicn is the u lit VI govern.
menl?
ono Of the morning dAlliss-noi the
one heretofore alluded to-went 40 far
az 10 state tue people II Uintah anu
Iron counties had no more right 10 say
what shall be the status Of the liquor
question In Salt Lake CITY thau nad
tue people of Colorado. DO tbs people
NJ the "futai di.tficis" end0ne this
viuw2 IL ~ more likely that they Will
insiHt mat each uaft oil the state ~ intut-
tsird Ia every other part Of It. without
lhb "fufai uitiTic,s" var Like would
cut sorry figure and disappear ~ tho
dWlndiing process. The people " the
uuufe Stale nave tho right to say what
Kind Of legislation shan prevail over
the whole Of ~.
Tue admission Of your c5temporary
Of the tact tnat "iu the rural uIftflolH
very large majority VI the PEOPLE
would favor tue pfDhlbiiion prglsci,"
has already been treated upon. IL also
Sail. "lu the larger e. t.Us the maI1f-
~ would probably Un against It,"
That Dol.
A very large uaj1fily In tho "fural
districts" iON a probable majority ~
the larger cillts against.
Tho uai1rliy IN tho larger cities is
only claimed uH probability, and { I"
general results upon this basis would
be a tremendous, overwhelming ina
l0fiiy tor the "nfohib.tI0u pfciccW Ia
the Territory al large, and tnat l.
what o. thc matter with your two CO.
tomp0afics.
But the probable msj0rity ",n tho
larger Ciiita' 10 au open question. mo
vole might DO Gloss, bat 70 would be-
liable 10 DO on the eide " sJbrluiy,
morality, contontmeut aud Prosperity,
aud consequently VI prohibition,
Tue sait Lake Tribune was kind
enough 10 sound % note VI warning Ia
the following w0fds:
"rhat our prohibition friends may be-
all loaded whom tho Convention moots.
we beg o. tell ihom that thoto Is no cone
sutuuonhl right Of yu,lugi thai that u a
privilege gained by the soyUrcIgu power
" the Etalo.n
That Is all right. In this country,
what IL The sovereign power Tue
answer 1.-The people. That power h
fully present In tho Convention. Tue
ncOpl 10 are there BY thuir duly olectou
representatives. II there Ia any intru-
lion 10 convey an idea IN thu quoted
paragraphs tlnt the sovereign people
have not right 10 provide, by delvga.
ton " othefwito, tor nn expression VI
their viii on any bui jUCt Whatever, there
must be n mistake h. u. Matters have
not rescued that point, lt IL 10 be
hoped they never will.
Tue same able Journal continued ita
warning thmi
"That further, there Is great dlner-
eucu between voting for an individual
luf an uMcnt anu IA Young MhutuNr iuu
property Ut some other Individuals shall
bo ,oguosiorel. The one IL tho exercise
| Of Judgment or Of partisan preference.
The other goes directly TO something
/ which, under our form Of government,
cannot DO tamporod with by "a voter or
all of tho voters combined, and that Is
tho inviolabiliiy Of contract, expressed
| or implied
Unfortunately for this announce
menI the wolghtof hoI and law SHOWS
II under. In proof Of this the "Ameri.
eau ami English Encyclol 10 Tia Of
Law" II here oile1. That standard
legal work says;
"Prohihltory liquor laws arc constitu-
| tiOnal, Notwithstanding theiF effect IN 10
| repeal or impair charter rights or annul
| previous contract obligations"
4 La support OF this authoritative dec.
laratlon nine decisions, tho ilrst Of
which IL Beer Go. Va Mass., % u. B.,
20, arc cited. joins NICHOLSON.