The Prescott daily news. (Prescott, Ark.) 1907-1941, 1914-02-10
ATTORNEY GENERALS OP-
INION ON GOING ACT
Cites Constitution of State Which
Provides that General Assem-
bly, Shall Not Grant Privi-
leges or Immunities.

ago an opinion which Atty General
Moose had written declaring the Go
ing Liquor Act unconstitutional mys-
terlously 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 pur-
lolned opinion was made public.
Since that time" says Gen. Moose
81 have been freely criticised by some
who favored the saloons and by others
who opposed them, and by several
newspapers in different parts of the
state. Some ministers of the gospel
have expressed surprise and regret
that | had gone wrong One news
paper said editorially that disclosures
growing out of the disappearance of
the opinion placed me in a very un-
enviable attitude.
THAT my desire to withhold the
opinion while applicants for license
were engaged in a legal battle and
spending their money in an effort to
obtain their rights under an act which
was held by me to be unconstitutional
stamped me as trimmer and as one
not fitted for the position of Attor-
.ney- general Either newspapers have
expressed surprise that | did not give
to the public reasons for an opinion of
such interest to the state"
Now that practically all Of the cases
pending in the county courts have
been decided, except one or two
Judge Moose is making it public. He
says further: Most of us have a
mild contempt for person who has
mot the courage of his convictions, al
though he may be otherwise decent.
1t seems to me no enemy of the sa-
looms could reasonably censure me for
giving out an opinion that an act of
the legislature intended to promote
temperance was void because in con-
hict with the Constitution. ! had
nothing to do with the preparation
or the passing Of the act, and cannot
Justly be held responsible for its pro-
visions. | was asked, by one entitled
to my opinion, whether or not the act
was constitutional. The prohibition
lists (and | am one of them) would
have approved a reasonable opinion
from me to the effect that the act
was constitutional and Valid and
would not have criticized me for Civ
ing it publicity while the cases were
pending in the courts.
"No one is bound by my opinions,
not even myself, for | have changed
and reversed several of them during
the last year. My purpose now in Civ
ing 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 do
ing is entirely selfish, if desire to
retain or regain the good opinion of
my friends is selfish"
The opinion is quite lengthy, The
attorney general says in part: 'lf
the act is unconstitutional, it is be-
cause it attempts to grant privileges
to white citizens which it with-holds
from negroes. The act authorizes
white adult people of any city or
town of the state to sign petition 50
the county court for the issuance OF
license for saloons, and if major lty
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 petitions, and are not
even allowed to be counted as being
opposed to them. They can have moth
ing to say under the act for or against
the saloon. White citizens may eX
press themselves effectively on one
side or the other, but blacks MT"
The attorney general cites the Con
stitution, which provides that The
General Assembly shall not grant to
any citizen or class of citizens priv
leges or immunities which upon Tie
same terms shall not equally belo 'g
to all citizens He says commenting
upon this.
THE negro is citizen. No one will
deny his citizenship. Does the Going
act grant to the white adult citizen
any privilege or immunity which it
with holds from adult black citizens? :?
Tf eo II attanntS tO do what the Com