The broad ax. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1895-19??, 1908-03-28
JUDGE CHARLES N. WALKER.
concluded from page one.l

as the question or SEnIS! oPchiAS
or closing was concerned; and the
overwhelming defeat of the charter.
due in most par, it is Claimed, to
tat fact. The petitioners urge their
right to an expression of the senu-
ment of the community as to wheth-
er this city is in favor OF an open
Sunday or a closed one for the pur-
pose of indicating their desire to their
representatives in the next legisla-
ture, so that they may have the ben
eft of such expression at its next
session, and give the people home
rule on this question II they express
a desire to have it. that petitioners
agitation for and intention to seek
such legislation were and are matters
of common knowledge in the commu-
nifty and well known to said COM
missioners: that all these considers-
tons deliberately have been ignored
by said commissioners, who have
gone out Of their way to put forced,
wrong and, in the circumstances,
wholly unreasonable construction up
on the proposed question. neither in
any way expressed therein nor rea-
sonahly to be inferred therefrom, and
upon that construction have declared
the question to be not a question Of
public policy at all
Respondents counsel say that
probably the question would have
been ordered on the ballot but for the
contentious Of the directors wno ap-
peared against it and whose objec-
tons were considered
In view Of all the surrounding
circumstances, the conclusion seems
irresistible that the board has con-
strued and treated this question as
q purely academic proposition, with
out giving the 174.146 petitioners due
benefit Of prescriptions that exist in
their favor, among them the presump-
ton Of good intent as against bad
intent; the presumption against alb
surdity,' which merely means the
presumption in favor of ordinary COM
mon sense, the presumption against
doing a vain or useless thing which
in this case would be planning action
for the nonenforcement Of a law,
which. as everybody knows, is not en-
forced now; and also without looking
at the question in the light of con-
temporary local history and condi-
tons above referred to, unless as
against all this it still can be said
that the question embodies a plan Of
action in violation Of law
IF it can be pointed out that
negative vote upon the question
would embody or result in any plan
action in violation Of law or against
it's enforcement, which could not be
fully rs wei undertaken or could not
be quite as lawfully and effectively
met and dealt with by the law and
the civil authorities after such vote
As before, the objection might be held
to be good and well taken
Let us assume that the vote has
been taken, that it is negative; that
is, against closing all places where
liquor is sold or given away on Sun
day. What Is the result? So far as
the law or the enforcement Of the
law is concerned. how is the situation
changed in the slightest degree?
What plan Of action is the COM
munity left to encounter? The law
remains precisely the same; precise
II the same officers Of the law remain
under precisely the same oaths and
obligations and with the same pow
ers to enforce It and under precisely
the same penalties as before for not
enforcing It
When this question was asked at
the hearing counsel sor respondents
frankly admitted thst IN respect Of
the things mentioned there would
Be No change. the situation would re
main the same.
what, then, Is the net result Of
the vote but . mere expression Of
opinion upon the question Of the
public poliey As to Sunday openias
or Sunday closing?
-Respondents' only answer Il that
such vote might be miseonstrued b.
the laxIess and leave room for argu
ment On their part that It meant 4
declaration IN favor Of nonenforce
ment a. the Law.
This reas0R-the mere possibility