Evening journal., 1908-01-16
ARGUMENT ON THE
LOCALOPTIONLAW
tcOntInued From TIrst Parel


namely:
"First-The General Assembly has no
power 10 submit the question of license
or no license to the people anywhere,
in all the districts. or IN any district,
except at the general election.
"Second-Before the General AS
sembly has the power under Article
XIII Of the constitution to submit to
the voters of any or all the districts of
the State the question of license or no
license, a majority of the members
OF the General Assembly in each House
from each district in which such ques-
ton is to be submitted must. as a con-
dition precedent, submit request as
provided in said article for the submits
sion of the question. This request is
necessary to give the General Assembly
the power to submit the question Of
license or no license under Article XIII
Of the constitution.
t"Third-The act is unconstitutional in
that By Sections IL and 70 thereof an
unconstitutional delegation OF legisla-
tive power is attempted 10 be made
TO the voters in each separate district.
the penalties and processes provided
by said section being enforced only If
a majority Of the electors in any dis
trict vote to enforce the same This
is clearly unconstitutional under the
decision Of our courts.
"Fourth-The act is unconstitutional
because 1t violated Section JIG OF Article
II Of the constitution prohibiting more
than one subject being embraced in an
act or in the title thereof. The act
under consideration embraces two sub
1eets, both of which are expressed in
the title"
General Election Proviso.
In support Of his contention for the
first reason. Mr.. Salisbury argued
that:
"At a general election only can the
real sentiment Of the people be obtain
ed. A vote at a general election
would secure the expression of all the
electors of the State without additional
expense. Nowhere in the grant of
legislative power to the General As
sembly can any provision be found
Which authorizes the holding of any
special election for any purpose what
soever, other than the filling of vacan-
cies in the General Assembly itself, as
provided in Section 6 of Article ii Of
the constitution, Cthe choosing of a
Representative in Congress being, Of
course, provided for bv Federal Law.
1t may therefore safely be said that
the Legislature. except under express
authority. may never constitutionally
provide for holding a special election
except in the case named.
"The only provision in the consu-
tuition relating TO the taking of vote
under the Local option Article pro-
vides that such vote shall be at gen.
erai election. and this even where the
vote is limited TO a particular district
only; it was never conceived or sug-
gested by any member of the constitu-
tional convention that a vote should
be provided for at any other time"
In support of his second contention
Mr. Salisbury said:
"Only one way is expressly provided
for proceeding under Article Kill The
request from a districts representa-
lives. and pursuant TO that request a
submission by the General Assembly
OF the question in that district,-one or
any number or all the districts may
request at the same time, and in such
case the General Assembly may submit
the question to the vote of the quali-
fed electors OF the several districts of
the State or any of them.
by a familiar legal maxim, the
statement of one thing excludes the
other" Mr.. Salisbury argued, "and
the convention in providing that vote
might be taken at the general elec-
ton. and on the request of a majority
Of the Representatives in both Houses
of the General Assembly from any
district, thereby in legal contemplation
excluded all other times, occasions and
methods"
Refers to Former Unconstitutional Act,
Then Mr.. Salisbury referred TO the
debate on the subject of local option
before the Constitutional Convention Of
1897, at which the people of the State,
by districts, were given the right to
vote on the question.
Referring to the third reason, Mr..
Salisbury said;
THE provision Of the Local Option
Law OF February 18th. 1s47, which was
adjudged unconstitutional in the case
of Rice VS.. Foster. is almost the same
as the Act of 1907. He then quoted
the two provisions referred to to show
the SlliildlAA9s
Analyses the New Act.
Section 5 of Article XIII provides
that
THE General Assembly mot the
qualified electors of the several dis
tricts) shall provide necessary laws 20
carry out and enforce the provisions OF
this Article. enact laws governing the
manufacture and sale of intoxicating
liquors under the limitations Of this
Article and provide such penalties as
may benecessary to enforce the same.
"Yet the General Assembly IN this
case has abdicated in favor Of the peo-
pie in the several districts Sections
IL and - of the act being invalid, the
whole act must fall; they cannot be
separated from e."
In support Of the fourth reason, hsv-
ing to do with the violation of Section
16 Of Article II Of the constitution,
prohibiting more than cne subject he
ing embraced in an act or in the title