Pine Bluff daily graphic. (Pine Bluff, Ark.) 1893-1942, 1914-02-10
HOLDS GOING ACT
UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Attorney Gen. Moose Issues
His Opinion, Which Was
Stolen and Withheld.
DRAWS COLOR LINE.
Says Legislature Has No Right to
DRAWS COLOR LINE.
Says Legislature Has No Right TO
Discriminate Against Any
Class of Citizens.

Little Rock, Feb. 9-Several weeks
ago an opinion which Attorney Cen
eral Moose had written declaring the
Going Liquor Act unconstitutional
mysteriously disappeared from his
office. While the context was not
| made public at the time, the fact that
| it had been written was not denied by
Judge Moose, and today the text of
the purloined opinion was made pub
lie.
"Since that time" says ATTORNEY
| General Moose, 81 have been freely
| criticized by some who favored the sa-
looms and by others who opposed
them, and by several newspapers in
different parts of the state. Some
| ministers of the gospel have express
ed surprise and regret that | had
gone wrong. One newspaper said edi-
| torially that disclosures growing out
of the disappearance of the opinion
placed me in very unenviable atti-
tude.
THAT my desire to withhold the
| opinion, while applicants for license
were engaged in legal battle and
spending their money in an effort to
obtain their rights under an act which
was held by me to be unconstitution-
al, stamped me as a trimmer and as
| one not fitted for the position of At
torney-general. Other newspapers
have expressed surprise that l did not
give to the public reasons for an
opinion of such interest to the state.
Now that all of the cases pending in
the county courts have been decided,
except one or two, Judge Moose is
"Most of us have a mild contempt for
a person who has not the courage of
his convictions. although he may be
otherwise decent. 1t seems to me no
| enemy Of the saloons could reasona-
bly, censure me for giving out an opin-
ion that an act of the Legislature in
| tended to promote temperance was
| void because in conflict with the Con-
stitution. l had nothing to do with
the preparation or passage of the act,
and cannot justly be held responsible
| for it's provisions. l was asked, by
nyon 06 n
or not the act was constitutional. The
| prohibitionists land l am one of
them) would have approved reason
| able opinion from me to the effect
that the act was constitutional and
valid and would not have criticised
me for giving it publicity while the
cases were pending in the courts.
"No one is bound by my opinions,
not even myself, for I have changed
and reversed several of them during
the last year. My purpose now in
| giving out the opinion is that my
friends who may be inclined to differ
from me, may have the reasons which
convinced me that the Act was in
conflict with the Constitution. My
motive in so doing is entirely selfish,
if a desire to retain or regain the
good opinion of my friends is selfish"
The opinion is quite lengthy. The
attorney general says in part: "If
the act is unconstitutional, it is be-
cause it attempts to grant privileges
to white citizens which it withholds
from negroes. The act authorizes
white adult people of any city or town
Of the state to sign petition to the
county court for the issuance of IL
cense for saloons, and if majority
of the white people sign such petition,
the court is authorized to issue the
licenses. Negroes and other people
who are not white are denied the
right to sign such petition, and are not
even allowed to be counted as being
opposed to them. They have nothing
! sto say under the act for or against
| the saloon. White citizens may ex-
press themselves effectively on one
side or the other, but blacks may
not"
The Attorney general cites the Con-
stitution. which provides that "The
General Assembly shall not grant to
any citizen or class Of citizens privi-