East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current, 1905-10-14
INDIANS CANNOT
GET WH|SKEY
IDAHO STATUTE FOR
BIDS THE TRAFFIC
Federal Decision Docs Not Open the
Doors TO the Indians in IdahO-A
State Law Forbids the Sale just as
Il Docs to Minors and Imbeciles.

The Indians in Idaho cannot drink
whiskey, says the Lewiston Tribune.
This is the opinion expressed by Geo.
W. Tannahil in commenting on the
recent decision of the circuit court of
appeals in the Dick case. In render
ing this decision, which held that
liquor could be introduced on the Nez
Perce reservation, the Jurisdiction of
the state being exclusive in that re-
gard, the court further gave comment
on the effect of the decision as it
might apply to encouraging the con-
sumption of intoxicants by Indians
with its evil effects, and suggested
that the legislature had power to reg
ulate the sale of liquor and there
fore. could prohibit its sale to Indians.
Mr.. Tannahill, in speaking of this
phase of the decision of the court, said
he was satisfied at this time 1t was
violation of the law to sell liquor 10
an Indian in Idaho, for the reason
that there is a state statute making
such an act a crime. He quotes the
language of the statute as follows:
Every person who sells or fur
nishes, or causes to be sold or fur
nished, intoxicating liquors to an In
dian. is guilty of a misdemeanor."
This section of the law can be
found in the penal code of 1901, Sec
ton 4717, and in the revised statutes
Ct 1887, section 1927.
The law was passed in 1879, at a
time when the Indians IN the state
were causing much trouble to the
T'hites through drunkenness. The law
also prohibited them from carrying
firearms. 1t seems that the federal
law. making 1t a peIiitentiary offense
to sell liquor 70 the Indians, to6fS pfec-
edence over the state law, in view of
the more severe penalty, and the state
enactment has therefore remained a
dead letter to be revived at this tine.
when by two decisions of the higher
branches of the federal court it held
the state laws apply to the Indian
country.
A decision of the federal court in
the district of Kansas was rendered
several months ago. in which the court
discharged a person convicted in the
lower federal court on the charge OF
selling liquor to an Indian, the decision
holding that the sale of liquor to en-
Indian was solely a'matter of state and
not federal jurisdiction, and that con-
gress had no right to enact law pro-
hibiting the sale of liquor to an Indian
~ had accepted an allotment in sew
crafty.
When this decision was rendered
the view gained circulation generaiE
that an Indian in Idaho could appro-
nriate booze to his hearts content, ou'
a more careful analysis of the decision
shows that the Indian can booze
only with the states consent. IL
Idaho. according to the law placed Oh
the statute books years ago, not ohi'
has the state refused to give the IN
dian consent, but has made 1t a misde
meanor for a person to sell an lndla
Iiouor. The penalty for misde
meanor in Idaho is one day to 81
months in the county Jail. and I'M
of 81 to 5000 or both imprisonmer
and fine.
Mr.. Tannahill explains that the sIa'
law is undoubtedly constitutional an
effective. and cites that it is along u
same line of legislation as that whic
prohibits the sale of~liquor to miho'
and imbeciles.