Pine Bluff daily graphic., 1912-07-16
Supreme Court Affi1ms the Ruling in Case of Ham
 nett Against Hodges.
IS A DISAPPOINTMENT
It Was Desire of Liquor Men to De- feat the Submission of the Ini-
 tiated Act at This Time.

Little Rock, Ark, July 15-The bill fer Statewide prohibition must be subm tied to the voters of Arkansas at the general election in September in spite of strenuous efforts of the anti-saloon leaders themselves to the contrary. This was decided in an opinion handed down by the Su- preme Court Monday in the case of J. F. Hammett against Earle w. Hedges, secretary of state.
 The action originated in the Sec ond Division of Pulaski Circuit Court when the prohibition workers brought petition for writ of mandamus to prevent the secretary of state from certifying out this bill, claiming that the petition on the initiative had not contained sufficent number of quali- fled voters. A demurrer interposed to the complaint was sustained and appeal was taken to the Supreme Court.
 The opinion of the higher court follows:
 In the Supreme Court of Arkansas. July 15, 1912. Hammett & Whissen vs Hodges, Secretary of State.
 Statement by the Court.
 The appellants petitioned the Cir cult Court for an injunction against the appellee, setting up that the sec retary of state, Earle w. Hodges, is preparing to publish and submit to the voters for adopt on or rejection an act to, prohibit the manufacture. sale or giving away in the State of Ark ansas, of any alcohol, or any spiritu- ous, ardent, malt, vinous or ferment- ed liquors, or any compound or pre- paration thereof, commonly called tonics, bitters or lmedicated liquors, which measure in full they set forth in their petition. They set up that the appellee, unless restrained, will publish and submit the measure They further allege that "the said Earle w. Hodges, secretary of state, has not accepted filed or considered pe- tition containing 8 per cent of the legal voters of the State upon a bas- is of the whole number of votes cast for the office of governor in the State of Arkansas at the regular general election last preceding the filing of said petition, but state the facts to be that there were filed with the secre- tary of state, from tme to time, upon different dates, different petitions, all being alike in form and relating to the same subject matter, but no one of which contained sufficient num- Der of signatures to constitute 8 per cent of the lyegal voters aforesasd d, though all of such petitions taken to- sether constitute such per cert"
 They allege that the said petition and measure proposed to be initiated thereby are contrary to and in con- fiict with the provisions of the act of the General Assembly of the State of Arkansas" approved June 10, 1911, entitled "An Act to provide for car rying into effect the initiative and referendum powers reserved by the people in Amendment No. 10 to he Constitution of the State of Arkansas on general, county and municipal 1 legislation.' That the act proposed is ill conflict with the enabling act iu 1 that it undertakes to initiate a meas ure to set aside and revoke the three mile petition orders made by the county courts of this State, prohibit ing the sale of liquor as provided un- der Sections 512S to 5132 Kirby's Di- l gest' and to set aside and revoke local option liquor laws, providing methods of determining whether the sale of intoXlcat ng liquors shall be prohibit ed in any county, city, town or town ship"
 To appellants petition a demurrer was interposed, which was sustained and the petition dismissed, and this appeal has been duly prosecutd.