East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current, 1905-03-23

Shall the local option law now in
pliance with the constitution or not
This is a matter that will have to be
decided by the supreme court when it
meets here in May. The law having
been in force this long, most people
have come to look upon it as definite
ly established, and probably few are
aware that it is now in jeopardy.
However, such is the case, and sin
gular as it may seem, 1t is the tenn
perance town of Hood River that is
seeking to have the law impeached,
while some half dozen saloon men of
| that place are interested in having
the law upheld. The case that is to
be tried here at the coming session
of the supreme court is that of the
City of Hood River VS.. P. F. Fouts,
a former saloon keeper of that peace
ful burg. John McCourt is the attor-
ney for the city, while w. H. Wilson
of The Dalles, represented the saloon
man. The issue is the recovery by
Fouts of $3.50 from the city for a Ii
cense that was not allowed to expire
because of the local option law. I'm
der that law 1t is directed that such
amounts shall be repaid to the saloon
keepers. Suit was first brought
against the city by Fouts in the cir
cult court of that district, and the de-
cision by Judge Bradshaw was favor
able to his side and upheld the local
option law.
The sole point on which the Hood
River side of the case is being fought
| in the supreme court is the constitu-
tionality of the law. By proving the
illegality of the law the attorney for
the city would save the town from re-
funding the amounts of the unused
licenses. In the brief which Mr.. Nc
Court is now preparing it is held
that the local option law is contrary
to section 81 of article l OF the state
constitution. which is as follows:
Sec. 21.-No ex-post-facto law nor
law impairing the obligation of con-
tracts shall ever be passed, NOR
SHALL ANY LAW BE PASSED THE
TAKING EFFECT OF WHICH
SHALL BE MADE DEPENDENT
UPON ANY AUTHORITY EXCEPT
AS PROVIDED IN THIS CONSTI-
TUITION; provided that laws locating
the capital of the state, locating coun-
ty seats, and submitting town and
corporate acts and other local and
special laws may take effect or not
upon a vote of the electors interested
1t is the latter part of the section
that is held to make the local option
law invalid, In the journal of the
constitutional convention which
adopted the constitution in 1855
there are some very interesting facts
in regard to the adoption of this sec.
ton. The latter part OF the section
was attached as an amendment, and
the journal states that Mr., Grover
moved an amendment to insert after
the word acts" the words "prohibi'
tory liquor law" and the motion wa
voted down. This fact is held to show
that it was not the intention of the
constitution makers to allow certain
localities to adopt laws for them
Selves governing the liquor subject
1t is held that If the law were gen
orally enacted all over the state
would be valid, but not otherwise
Also, it ia held by the attorney TO
the appellant that the referendum
amendment does not make the loca
option law a legally enacted one.
Whatever the outcome may be tn
case is sure to arouse considerabl
interest when it is tried in the su
preme court here in May. At tina
time oral arguments will also b
4 made by the different attorneys.