Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1911-06-05

6EWUIIIG COTOfeU CeTUnCnTe
packed In the 25-ceut can Of X Baking Pow
der to the JAQUBs MFG. Co., Chicago.
rule the alteration should be con-
strued in connection with the local
option law so as to give effect to the
former and to interfere as little as
possible with the latter, allowing
both to remain operative as far as
feasible.
1t will be remembered that exclu-
siye authority to license, regulate,
control, suppress or prohibit the sale
of intoxicating liquors for beverage
purposes by any voters who reside
outside the city limits. The amend
ment, therefore, impliedly repeals so
much of the local option law as per-
mits registered voters of any coun-
ty," to petition for a prohibition
election in the entire territory or to
vote upon the question when any
part of such district is an incorporat-
ed city or town, and also so much
thereof as declares that the provi-
sions of that law are enforceable in
any precinct that may lie partially
within and partially without an in
corporated city or town" L y. j..
Sec. 1920. The change in the or
ganic act impliedly amends Sec.
1888, L. 0. L., so as to allow an elrc-
tion to be held on the question of
prohibition in ward or precinct of
such municipality, Notwithstanding
prohibition I "a. rieu n the entire
county, or in subdivision thereof
0hen the latter district embraces n
precinct wholly within an incorrLr.
G'eC city or town. The alteration in
thu fundamental law divorces sIuh
municipalities from COMFY tf
which they form part, so thu; the
remainder of the county and incor-
Tcrated cities and towns theteia con-
stilute, in effect. separate political
entities with respect to each other,
CTabor V. Lander, "a Ky. 237, 242) in
all of which the local option law may
be put into operation in the same
manner and to the same extent that
it was formerly employed in the en-
tire county, in subdivision thereof
or in precinct therein. 1t is be-
lieved that the exclusive power to
license or prohibit the sale of intox-
icating liquors, which purports to be
vested in Incorporated cities and
towns, having been expressly made
subject to the provisions of the local
option law, the right thus granted to
the municipality is necessarily gov
| arOa1 htr oil uttnh YNrnHiciAng 20
as applicable, requiring for its en-
forcement, in changing an order for
or against prohibition, that the petit
tion therefor should be presented to
the county court, which should order
nelection to be held to determine
the question, Notwithstanding the
phrase, within the limits" of the
municipality is used in the amend
ment.
In view of this conclusion it is un-
necessary to determine whether or
not the last alteration of the organic
act is self executing in that 1t does
not require any Legislation to carry
the amendment into effect Long v
City of Portland, So Or. 90; Acme Co.
v. sAtoria, 40 Or, $40. A moments
reflection, however, will show that
the fundamental law as changed
may be difficult to apply or enforce
in precincts situate partially within
and partially without an incorporated
city or town. Precincts that are en-
tirely within or wholly without such
a municipality will not be materially
affected by the alteration. If coun-
ty could be so divided that all Its
precincts formed part of an incor-
porated town, the amendment Of the
clause of the constitution would seem
practically to disfranchise every le'
gal voter in the county from deter.
mining whether or not the sale o.
intoxicating liquors should be pro
hibited either in the county or In q
municipality therein. The same re-
suit would necessarily follow as Il
precincts partially within and par
TALLY without city or town. Tht
county court, It is true, could read
, just election precincts, making theii
, boundaries conform to the limits O
an incorporated city or town. l.. 0
L. Sec 1904. AS no statute exist
, commanding an establishment OF tn
boundaries of a precinct it is doubt
, full If a rearrangement of the limit
= thereof could well be enforced, AM
= hence it would seem possible for
county court to defeat any attempt Il
/ change it's order, either for o
= against prohibition in precincts par
/ TALLY within and partially without
= city or town. Notwithstanding tn
! possible consequences suggested, W
: believe the amendment is valid an
, for that reason is susceptible Of be
= ing under the restrictions indicated
t Giving to each word of the las
= amendment the importance to whic
= Is entitled, II will be seen that Will
r the legal voters of every city an
e town are authorized to license 0
:. prohibit the sale of intoxicating !
] quors therein, the clause but sue
% ,.,{thfp itu limit