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

+ response to our invitation to ;
+ the public to discuss the sub .
+ ject with the view of helping .
+ to solve the liquor problem, .
+ rather than keep up an argu- .
+ ment. Some of the writer's are .
+ willing their names should be .
+ used with their articles, while .
+ others prefer that they should .
+ not--not because they are (.
+ ashamed of their views, but be- /.
+ cause they do not care to be i.
! In the lime light. -Editor.) !
- + - !. + 1. + !. i. !. + i I. + !
McCRACKEN ON LOCAL OPTION
Editor of the Statesman: In Sun
days issue of August 8, there ap
peared an editorial under the cap
tion, Local Option in Boise" Ii
that editorial you say that under oul
present laws I'VE seem to have the
very thing that is being so vigorously
demanded, namely, local option. Z
Now let us see if the local option
people really have what they are con-
tending for. There is law which
has been upon the statute books of
this state since 1898, and which en-
titles any city, town or village coun-
Gil to prohibit the sale of intoxicat-
ing liquors within it's limits. Under
this statute, the voter who desires to
express his wishes upon the question
as to whether or not intoxicating
liquors may be sold within his home
town must take chances upon the
action of some few men who may
hold similar views to his own and
who may not. The recent efforts
made by the people of American
Falls to exercise their option under
this law affords us an illustration Of
how easily the wishes of the people
of any town within this state may
be set aside by a council which is not
bound by law to regard their wish
es, even when expressed by ballot,
upon liquor questions.
Some months ago the people of
that town petitioned the council to
prohibit the sale of intoxicating Ii
quors within its limits. The petit
ton was signed by large majority
Of the inhabitants of that place. The
council, composed of five men, said
to the people:
I'VE will hold an election so that
you may express your wishes upon
this question. If a majority say No
saloons, we will refuse to grant any
more licenses"
An election was held and the re-
suit was that a majority voted against
the sale of liquors within the town
limits. Then it was up to the coun-
Gil to carry out it's agreement with
the people. In accordance with the /
vote of the majority an ordinance !
was introduced at a regular meeting
of the council on the 4th of August !,
prohibiting the sale of intoxicating
liquors within the limits of American
Falls after October of this year, and
a majority of the council refused &C
ton upon the proposed ordinance.
They offered no explanation to the
amazed people for their arbitrary
action. One of them did say, how
ever, that the majority of the council
owed their election to the saloon menl
and they were going to stand by
them. Now who really has the right,
SO far as American Falls is con-
cerned, to pass upon the question asl
70 whether or not intoxicating liquors
may be sold there? The people Of
that place? No: just small number
Of the people of that place have any
such right at the present time. Just
i've men have that privilege in Am
arican Falls under this statute which
10 many say is better than local
option law.
The people Of Idaho have reached
! point In their political progress
xhere they refuse to delegate the
light to pass upon the liquor question
% council OF board Of county COM
4 American Falls is not the only
place in Idaho where the rights OF a 4
the people are to be ig- I
nored. There Is little place in (
Ada county. just seventeen miles 4
Town the valley from the capital ci- /
y. called Star. This town il not Il
From the language Of a
tour editorial. this place would I
Ieem to have the very thing that Is {
,eing so vigorously commended fortt
local option,)" !
Let us see who has the right to say Ii
whether or not liquors shall be sold I
- ,,uscno,ro~n<oA 49, a. -. srvsg y !