Arizona republican., 1908-01-12
LOCAL OPTION
 LAW ATTACKED
The Subject Submitted to
 the Supreme Court
In the Meantime the Call for an Election is Held Up.

A sudden delaying obstruction was encountered yesterday by the promot- CTS of the local option movement. The board of supervisors was engaged in the completion of the election call. by fixing the polling places and naming the election officers when word was received that the saloOikeepers had employed Judge Stillwell to apply for an injunction restraining the board from issuing the call as it intended 10 do yesterday
 The intention of the opposition was communicated to District Attorney Bullard who after a conference with Judge Stillwell and afterward with Judge Kent. announced to the board the situation in which matters stood. He said that in the proposed injunction proceedings the constitutiOnality of the local option law would be attacked. He said that a stipulation had been entered into by which formal appli- cation for a temporary restraining or der would be made to Judge Kent at four o'clock and formal order deny ing or granting the injunction would be made. An appeal would be taken from it to the supreme court which will sit this week. The stipulation pro vided that both sides should waive the time for filing briefs and permit the matter to come directly before the court
 Mir. Bullard was asked by the mem bers of the board if the law was not mandatory; if it was not required that the call should be issued as prayed for. He replied that it was but he said he had consulted Dr. Hughes and others who were prominently interested in the movement for prohibition and they had consented to the course outlined by him. He said that not much delay would be involved by the proposed plan while if any other were pursued an injunction would be applied for and argued and then the matter would have to reach the supreme court in the
 usual way. It could not possibly be decided before the next meeting of the court. It might be said to turn out that the law was invalid. as the salOOn- keepers -contended. In that case the expense of s15oO for holding the special election would be wasted.
 The supervisors consented to the
 plan suggested by Mr Bullard and ,at four o'clock an application was made to Judge Kent for temporary injunc- tion. At the same time there was sub- mitted an agreed statement of facts The application was formally denied and the case then went. under the stip- ulation. 10 the supreme court Tn the meantime the board of super visors completed the making out of the call. that is. the selection of polling | places and election officers. All this will come in handy if the decision of
 the supreme court should be favorable
 to the local option law
 | It iS cOntended by the salOOnkeepers | that the law is unconstitutional in that | the legislature delegates to boards oi supervisors the power of enacting pro- hibition when there is no constitutional authority for such delegation of power ! It is the theory of the applicant for tho 1 injunction that the legislature itselt might have enacted prohibition sub- i iect to the vote of the people in tho districts affected
 1 In all states where there are loca | option laws. county authorities ant
 municipalities are empowered to de- | clare prohibition districts on the vote ' of the people but in such states ther'
 are constitutional provisions permit
 ting the legislature to confer sucf | power.
 | Reference is made to a Texas deci'
 sion on the old prohibition law of Tex as which was declared unconstitutiona
 on the same grounds as are occupied in this case. The constitution was af' terward amended so that the power o 1 establishing local option districts migh
 be conferred upon the county author
 ities.