The Idaho Republican. [volume] (Blackfoot, Idaho) 1904-1932, 1908-09-24

missionsts. 70 say whether Or not II
quors shall be sold in that TORN. Jhe
board refused % sfsnt he iicsnSsl'
But the law does not AZ how long
this refusal n good for: consequently
the vigilant saloon man may renew
his application every three months.
or oftener. II he chooses to do 20.
and just as often the people OF that
community must demonstrate against
the issuance Of . license with no as
surance that their remonstrance win
be needed.
1t Is said, although hope that the
report is untrue, that one member Of
the board Of county commissioners
who voted against the granting Of q
license some time ago, proposes to
vote for the issuance Of a license for
the sale Of Intoxicating liquors when
application shall be made, Himself
and one other constitute a majority
Of the board. A
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
Eyes" or mo" upon this question 90
far as It affects their own community.
They have expressed their option. not
by ballot, but BY petition, to three
men; and If 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 yohr community. We viii
permit saloon Or saloons to be run
down there contrary to your WILL.
Is this plan Of dealing with any
question democratic in principieg Ia
IT republican in principle? Is 1t Am7
'erican II 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 enti-
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. well. elect q
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
find 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
sion shall be direct and not indirect.
In the same editorialyou have well
sand that local option and prohibi-
ton are regarded by many as syn
onymous terms.s The idea Is errone-
GUS. "A voter can consistently sup
port local option and at the same time
vote to license a saloon. BY local OPP
ton we give the people the right to-
say "yes," or mo- upon the subject |
ofsprohibition. The same people who /
now demand this right. also demand !
the right to vote directly upon the \
selection Of all candidates for state |
and county Offices and for the ONCE
OF United States senator. Il
The day has passed In Idaho poli-
tics when a7few men can get together
and "put up slate" or declare
party principle. However humble q /
voter may be. he 10 going TO demand |
the fight to pass directly upon all
great social and secoh0inic questions. |,
and the time iscnot FAR distant when
We win See CHS idea Incorporated I'M
to statutory law and IN every coma
fion~ealth under the American nassI
sincerely Yours, i,
'RoBERTM. McCRACKEN. NJ
800. o.. ...z econ ~. ~ ~ 49,. cnIt