La Junta tribune., 1911-03-25
That Two Per Cent Ordinance.

We have been told of the many
drastic and terrible things that
would have happened to us II this
ordinance had become part of the
law governing the people OF this
city.
The fourteenth amendment to the
constitution provides that mo state
shall make or enforce any law which
shall abridge the privileges or i'm
munities OF citizens of the United
States; nor shall any state deprive
any person OF life, liberty or prop
erty without due process of law"
palities have TO control the liquor
traffic is derived from what is term.
ed the police powers OF the state.
Under any system that power is
lodged with the legislative branch of
the government II belongs TO that
department to exert what Is known
as the police powers OF the state and
to determine. primarily, what meas.
ures are appropriate or needful for
the protection OF the public morals.
the public health or the public safe
ty."
IF therefore, a statute purporting
to have been enacted TO protect the
public health, the public morals or
the public safety. has no real or
substantial relation to those OBJ
jects, or is palpable invasion of
rights secured by the fundamental
law. II is the duty OF the courts TO
80 adjudge and thereby give effect
10 the constitution"
The above lines are quoted froEi
The opinion OF the supreme court OF
the United States AS delivered by
Justice Harlan, who is now upon the
supreme court bench, In the case OF
Mugier vs.. Kansas. reported In 1913
4. s. Reports at page 656.
This Is the protection the people
OF La Junta have against erratic and
fanaticai laws and is II not suffici-
ent!
The two per cent ordinance could
be construed only sufficiently dras-
tic as TO protect the public NOR
ais. the public health or the public
safety" and there Is no one with the
audacity to state that the people OF
La Junta do not want these funda'
mcntais protected fully.
The intent OF the two per cent
ordinance was to assist the local
officers In enforcing the present local
option laws put In force by the
people two years ago. and which the
councilmen, elected at that time.
promised 10 enforce II the people
yotcd To make the city dry terri
tory.
The constitution Of the United
states and federal laws do not allow
local laws or ordinances to Interfere
with commerce between cities or
states, thus this did not Intend To
prevent and could not prevent the
bringing Ia Of liquor In original
packages by individuals for their per
sonal use.
II did intend TO prevent. and had
Il become = law and been enforced u
would have prevented the frafficinE
In liquors within the boundaries OF
the city and within one mile te-
yond the outer boundaries thereof
and that is what the people wanted
when they voted the town dry. II
10 also what the people In the coun'
Try surrounding the city desired when
they voted this territory dry by pre-
cincts.
Any psrson who In familiar with
the conditions existing during the
past two years and giving this or
diaaace . reasonable construction cal
readily discern that It's sole object
and purpose was to stop the boot
lcgging and the Illegal sale Of liquor
that WAS and In going on In our
midst.
win the same breath we are told
Of the evils Of bootiesging and that
the ordinance which was Intended "a
stop Il and would have stopped I,
had Il become . Law and enforced
should not become . law.
We are told that the danger Of ths
Two psf csat ordnance was In ths
pkoo1butllos Of drastic lnterprets