Page images
[ocr errors]

town of Greensboro, N. C., with a population of about 16,000 received 5,270 gallons of spirits during the month of December, 1913, alone.

In Alabama a local option Governor was elected, and Congressman Hobson was defeated in the primaries for United States Senator on the prohibition issue by a large majority.

Louisiana passed a law permitting the sale of near beer in dry territory.

In the Northern States the Anti-Saloon League is constantly playing politics, and wherever a disorderly saloon is found it is dramatized and capitalized for the purpose of arousing sentiment against all saloons. The organized liquor trade, both wholesale and retail, is bending its energies towards law enforcement and the strictest regulation, but it gets no encouragement or support from any of the so-called temperance organizations.

In Pennsylvania the Supreme Court has decided that the Brooks High License Law gives the judges of the License Court absolute discretion in the licensing of saloons. If, therefore, a judge is elected as a prohibitionist, he can make the country dry by simply refusing all licenses.

In Idaho the Supreme Court ruled that a saloon is not a nuisance, since it is authorized by law, and that it cannot become a nuisance so long as it is conducted in accordance with the law.

In South Dakota the elections this year resulted in 92 cities and towns voting against prohibition, and 62 voting in favor of prohibition.

The Minnesota elections resulted in 446 towns being wet, and 291 dry, being a decrease of 29 wet towns over the preceding year. However, the Northern part of Minnesota has been declared dry by the United States Supreme Court under the old Indian Treaty, by which the presence of some 7,000 Indians affects the property interests of 272,000 white people.

Michigan now has 34 dry counties, and 40 wet, being an increase of one dry county.

In New York State, in 1914, the result of the township elections showed 385 full license towns, 146 partial license towns, and 402 no-license towns; showing an increase of 10 full license towns; and a decrease of 2 partial license towns and 8 no-license towns over the 1913 elections.

The Ohio license code went into full operation in November, 1913. The limitation clause of one saloon to each 500 population proved a source of much disturbance; but the trade has now recovered its poise, and it is felt that much good is being derived from the general operation of the license law.

The Allison Law of Texas, in Section 6, permits liquor advertisements in newspapers which have a circulation in both wet and dry territories.

The material points of the Transportation Law of Tennessee, affecting orders from that State to dealers in other States, were declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the State, thus allowing the purchase of any quantity desired for personal use.

The Webb-Kenyon Act has been declared constitutional in every State in which it has been made an issue.


California defeated State-wide prohibition by a majority of 191,800 votes. A referendum amendment prohibiting another vote on the question within eight years was lost.

Ohio. In Ohio prohibition was defeated by 84,512 majority, and the Home Rule Amendment was carried by 12,567 majority. The Home Rule Amendment annuls the county option law and makes it impossible to enact State prohibition by statute. The result of this election will be to make the municipalities and township areas outside municipalities the unit in voting upon the license question.

Arizona voted for prohibition by a small majority. The law takes effect on January 1, 1915.

Colorado voted for prohibition also by a small majority, but the Act fails to provide a penalty for violation, and is otherwise so faulty that it may lead to a contest in the courts. It goes into effect January 1, 1916.

Washington voted for prohibition by about 14,000 majority. Effective January 1, 1916.

Oregon voted for prohibition by about 20,000 majority. Effective January 1; 1916.

Alabama:-Since the last report one county in the State has voted dry making sixteen counties in the State having held local option elections since the passage of the Local Option Law by the Legislature of 1911; eight counties voting wet and eight counties voting dry.

A primary election for Governor was held May 11, 1914, resulting in the nomination of a Local Option Governor; nomination is equal to election in this State; in this election Congressman Hobson was repudiated by the people in the vote for Senator, on the prohibition issue.

Arizona:-State-wide prohibition was the issue in the November election. The drys won by about one thousand majority.

The Amendment briefly is: "Ardent spirits, ale, beer, wine, or intoxicating liquors of whatever kind shall not be manufactured in or introduced into the State of Arizona under any pretense. A violator shall be guilty of a misdemeanor penalized by imprisonment from ten days to two years and fined from $25 to $300 and costs. Nothing in this amendment shall apply to the manufacture or sale of denatured alcohol. The Legislature shall, by appropriate legislation, provide for the carrying into effect of this amendment. This amendment to take effect on January 1, 1915."

Arkansas:- Nothing new in legislation has taken place since 1913.

The Supreme Court has decided, in the case of City of Texarkana v. Hudgins Produce Co., that cider is an alcoholic beverage.

The Supreme Court also ruled that the Act of 1913 known as the Going Law, regulating the issuance of liquor licenses and providing that when a majority of the adult white inhabitants of a city or town sign a petition for the granting of such licenses the County Court may issue such licenses in wet territory, is constitutional.

California -A town may pass laws prohibiting the sale of liquor or soliciting, or making contracts within its boundary, but thie Supreme Court holds that, since the town has no power over the local traffic outside its corporate limits, the law only prohibits the soliciting and contracting for the sale of liquor to be delivered within the town, and does not prohibit the taking of orders in the town for delivery outside its limits.

In the case of Golden & Company v. Justices Court of Woodland Township, Yolo County, the Court of Appeals held that advertisements in newspapers circulating in dry districts, addressed to the general public, and not to any particular person, are permitted.


During the past year, that is to say, from June 1, 1913, to June 1, 1914, there have been 56 elections. Fifty under the Wyllie Local Option Law, and six under the Initiative and Referendum. The cities of Hanford and Willows also voted under the Initiative on the same ballot with the Wyllie Local Option Law.

Thirty-five cities and twenty-one supervisorial districts voted. Eighteen cities voted wet. Fifteen were wet, and three—Merced, Hanford and Watts—had been dry for two years. Fourteen districts voted dry. Seven voted wet.

In Hanford there was a change in favor of the license forces over the result of two years previous of 117 votes, and in the City of Eureka, there was also an increase of 889 votes.

Seventeen cities voted dry. The vote in Orland was a tie, and is the only wet city which changed to dry. This election was contested in the courts, and decided in favor of the wets. Avalon voted dry, but since February 25th of this year, both bar and table licenses have been granted.

There appears to be an increase in sentiment in favor of the adoption of regulatory ordinances in the smaller cities of the State, for the reason that the Wyllie Law simply decides whether the community shall be wet or dry, with no limitation as to the number of licenses or other regulatory features.

The State-wide prohibition amendment was defeated in November by 191,800 majority. The vote being 540,612 in favor of the measure and 348,771 against it. An initiative measure providing against holding local option elections oftener than once in eight years was lost. San Francisco showed upwards of 83,000 votes against prohibition and only 17,000 in its favor. In Los Angeles County 124,324 votes were registered against the amendment and 122,550 for it. Prohibition would have meant the wrecking of the wine industry, the most important business in the State.

There was incorporated in the proposed law a clause providing that a second conviction for serving wine at meals in one's own home should be punishable by imprisonment. This drastic clause cost the drys many votes, as did the fear that prohibition would effect the attendance at the Panama-Pacific Exposition.

The Los Angeles Tribune of November 8th says in an editorial in part: “California was not prepared to inflict that injury upon its vineyards that would have resulted had this amendment been adopted in the form in which it was submitted, but it is clearly manifest, as the returns are studied, that had it proposed merely to put an end to the retail traffic in liquor, the saloon would have been banished.

"If the liquor sellers of California possess a grain of common sense they will henceforth do everything within their power to divorce their traffic from political affiliations. They will keep out of politics. Only as they separate themselves from the forces and institutions with which hitherto they have made common cause and entered into alliance can they hope to placate that profound public sentiment that manifested itself so strongly in the election.

"The men who are engaged in the liquor traffic must cleanse that traffic, in so far as it humanly can be done, of the objectionable features wherewith it has been surrounded."

Avalon, Santa Catalina Island, which has been a closed town on Sundays ever since its incorporation voted at the November election in favor of an open Sunday with regulated saloons.

Visalia, Tulare County, voted wet by 1,042, a majority of 260 against prohibition, reversing the dry majority of 400 voted last spring

Colorado:—In the Spring Local Option elections, La Jara, Manitou, Nederland, Rifle and Swink voted in favor of license; Akron, Brighton and Grand Valley voted against it.

The vote on State-wide prohibition in November resulted in a majority of 11,572 in favor of the amendment; 129,589 voting for and 118,017 voting against it. Denver County voted strongly wet, the majority against the amendment ran over 9,000. The wets carried 24 counties and lost 39.

Briefly the amendment runs: “After January 1st, 1916, no person, association or corporation shall, within this State, manufacture for sale or gift any intoxicating liquors; no person, etc., shall import into this State any intoxicating liquors for sale or gift; and no person, etc., shall sell or offer any such liquor for sale, barter or trade.

"Provided, however, that the handlers of such liquors for medicinal or sacramental purposes may be provided for by Statute."

As the matter now stands the measure is merely an addition to

« PreviousContinue »