The Caldwell tribune. [volume] (Caldwell, Idaho Territory [Idaho]) 1883-1928, 1905-01-07
ard there you have it--Vive la
Dubois. Whoopee! ..@
SUGGESTIONS TO REPUBLICAN,
Il 80 LEGISLATORS. a- rs

> clple, between progressive Reput
licanism and enlightened Demot
racy? We are not going to argu
the question, but there is not tn
: thickness of thumb nail between
the two old parties, if we take as
criterion the dominant element il
each. The last campaign disclose
a barrenness of National issues tina
was almost pathetic. Indeed Their
was no issue, merely the questsop
Who is the better man, Roosevelt
or Parker? Locally, there was thu
other question, Are the Mormon!
still multiplying and replenishing
through the instrumentality O
polygamy? Dubois and Heitfelt
said, "they be-" Gooding anc
Borah said, they baint," and thai
was the beginning and end of the
controversy. All sides agreed thai
if "they be" they ought to be
whipped. There was no difference
of principle, simply question Of
fact. There being, at this moment,
nothing between the two old parties,
it might be interesting to speculate
on what will come between them,
for some thing must. There must
be an issue.
In looking over the possibilities,
we are somewhat inclined to think
that the temperance question may
rise to place of first importance
within the next two years. Forces
are at work within the Republican
party which impel it towards Sc
rlously taking the matter in hand,
1t is well known that President
Roosevelt is in favor of regulation
and restriction of the liquor traffic
and 1t need not surprise anybody it
ne SHOULD suggest something by
way of regulative legislation. In
any event, there is fair prospect of
the Republican party taking the
question up with view to securing
practical results.
We believe that the great MAORI
ty OF the people have come to the
conclusion that, at present, absolute
prohibition is unattainable. 1t is
too far in advance of public senti.
ment. But there is wide field of
operation between absolute prohibi-
ton and unrestricted license. There
is the question of sellers RESPONSE
blllty, also the question of purchas.
err liability. These are only cover |
ed in very inadequate way by
present statutes.
For the consideration of the
present legislature something like
the following might be suggested:
An act making the vender of in
toxicants liable in damages for
every person found intoxicated up-
on his premises. with a proviso
hat after the detection of a certain
number of cases, say three, the
7ender's license be revoked and his
light to engage in the liquor bust
less in this State forever annulled
This would be but one feature Of
he act. Then, the constitution
permitting, there, might be created
n each County a board of LIQUOR
ratio supervisors, obligated and
laid to enforce the law. We be-
leve that in special board lies the
Iope of regulation and restrictive
1easures. That board should have
osolute control, under the law, of ,
IL liquor traffic within its jurisdic- |
ION. 1t should have no other ,
lV'l tunction-nothing else to do. I
10 license should issue without its
pproval, and it should be empower
to revoke licenses instauter.
Is not necessary here to work
ut the detail of such a law A
undred important things will {
lggest themselves to a thoughtful
erson. If the State constitution +
oes not permit of the creation of u
Ich a board, would it not be y
BOD way to raise the whole cues G. G.
IN to propose a constitutional II
authorizing the leeis- u
lure to create the board? We "
IleVH the o-oaa. Gt