The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1908-04-11
ALABAMA
COURT On THE
8 . CLOCK LAW
Law is Constitutional, Says
Tribunal, and 1t Must
Be Enforced.
ATTACKS ON PROHIBITION ACT
CAME FROM POINTS WHERE SA-
Looms HAD BEEN VOTED OUT
IN COUNTY ELECTIONS.
SnAciaI TO The JnnrraI


Montgomery. Ala. April IO-In
touching upon the question of wheth-
or or not the constitution means that
two-thirds of the entire mem bership
of the legislature should vote on a
measure not included in the call for
an extra session, the opinion saws:
The term hour can only intend such
number present or voting. as the case
may be. as would make a quorum for
the stated transaction of business"
There was a contention that a bill
could not even be introduced at a
special session except by permission
of twO-thirdS vote of the house
The court did not agree with this
point.
There is no mistaking the subject
treated by the act as announced in
the title" says the court. We there
fore affirm the constitutional suftic-
iency of the title of the act as well
az the presence of but one subject in
the enactment itself" In conclusion
the opinion says: We therefore hold
that the act is not subject TO the OBJ
on either of these appeals The re-
spective judgments appealed from are
hence affirmed"
The Nine O'clock Law.
The nine o'clock case came from
the Mobile city court Frank Four
ment was held to be guilty Of viOlat-
ing the law and appealed. The lower
court is affirmed.
Reviewing this law the opinion of
TIE court says, in part: The Origi-
nal purposes evinced by the title of
the original bill was to regulate the
sale or giving away of liquors, a reg
ulatiOn of the saloon The saloon. a
common parlance, is place where in
tOxicating liquors are sold. II has
other definitions, lut the context
leaves no room for doubt that its
meaning was intended to be as We
have stated. More infinitely viewed
the original purpose was to regulate
the disposition of intoxicants by sub
jecting the more common agency,
thereof, me saloon, to reputation IN
respect to opening and closing, keep
ing and selling or giving away the
defined liquors. The title Of the sub
Stitute measure reaffirms in the main
in its first sentence the idea OF regu-
latioD through the saloon. but the STc.
ceeding phrase employs language suf-
nciently comprehensive to include for
the essential purpose OF conveying
notice to the mem berS OF the legis-
lature and to the public as we'll the
regulation of the sale orr giving away
of spurious. vinOus or malt liquors
through. by or from any agency in the
state holding a license to deal in the
liquors described
It is apparent from a comparison of
the titles and the enactment as well.
that the Substitute was but an extern
sion, an expansion, of the original
method by which the regulation de-
sired was 10 be effected, that the
greater embraced in the cOmprehen-
sive second phrase of the title to the
substitute includes the lesser, the sa
loon.
That such an extension or eXpan-
sion did MOI operate a departure from
the original bill and hence was not
amenable 10 the constitutional require
ment with respect to new bills. is
conclusion supported by both decis-
ions of the court. Both opinions were
written by Justice Mcclellan, the
youngest member of the court. There
was no dissenting opinion.
The attacks on the general prOhi-
bitiOn act came from Morgan and
Jefferson counties. NJ. 2. Woodward
of Decatur. and Ben Meyer of Birm-
ingham. sought to secure saloon Ii
censes by mandamUs to the probate
Judges of their respective counties.
The lower courts decided against
them and the supreme court today af
firmed the lower court.