The Idaho Republican. [volume] (Blackfoot, Idaho) 1904-1932, 1908-09-18
Discussing the Liquor Question

.s
: law the option is given, not to the
; people of Star, but to three men who
compose the board of county COM
missioners, to say whether or not Ii
quors shall be sold in that town. The
board refused to grant the license.
But the law does not say how long
this refusal is good for; consequently
the vigilant saloon man may renew
his application every three months,
or oftener, if he chooses to do so,
and just as often the people of that
community must demonstrate against
the issuance of license with no as
surance that their remonstrance will
be needed.
4 It is said, although hope that the
! report Is untrue, that one member Of
the board of county commissioners
who voted against the granting of a
license some time ago, proposes to
vote for the issuance of license for
the sale of Intoxicating liquors when
| application shall be made. Himself
and one other constitute majority
of the board. s.
There are fully 500 people in the
vicinity of Star who do not want the
saloon, to about twenty or more who
do. And these 500 people you seem
to. think have the option of saying
yes" or no. upon this question SO
far as 1t affects their own community.
They have expressed their option, not
by ballot, but by petition, to three
men; and il, the report is true, two
OF the three men will say to the 500
people OF that community:
What care we about your wish
es? The law says that we, and not
you, have the right to say what is
best for your community. We will
permit a saloon or saloons to be run
down there contrary to your WILL
is this plan OF dealing with any
question democratic in principle? Is
1t republican in principle? Is it Am
erican in principle?
Then is it any wonder that the man.
hood and the womanhood of this
state refuse any longer to depend up
on two or three men in their COM
munity to act for them in this mat
ter? They want what they are emit
tied to, and that is: The right to pass
directly upon this question.
In the case of the village of Star,
someone will say: ''Oh, we'll, elect a
board of county commissioners and
town councils that you can depend
upon to carry out your wishes"
That is the argument of most peo-
pie who oppose local option. They
insist that the will of the people must
ind expression through two or three
men, while the optionists propose to
give every voter in every part of the |
county an opportunity to express |
themselves at the same time upon |
this question and that such express 6
sion shall be direct and not indirect. t
In the same editorial you have well S
sand that local option and prohibi- I
ion are regarded by many as syn y
'nymous terms. The idea is errone- a
Jus. A voter can consistently sup r
ort local option and at the same time v
'ote to license saloon. BY local OPP a
ion we give the people the right to =
ay yes" or mo" upon the subject d
# prohibition. The same people who h
low demand this right, also demand "
he right to vote directly upon the c
election Of all candidates for state +
nd county Offices and for the Office g
4 United States senator. Il
The day has passed in Idaho poll t,
les when few men can get together 81
nd put up slate" or declare a is
arty principle. However humble a a
otter may be, he Is going to demand A
ne right to pass directly upon an ne
reat social and economic questions,
nd the time is not far distant when c,
re will see this idea incorporated In s.
0 statutory law and in every com II
nonwealth under the American nag. q
Sincerely yours, tft
ROBERT M. McCRACKEN. a,
--- - = ---------------- TIKI. te
THE STATE w. q. n m NycEyr n