OCR Text |
Show THE ONLY QUESTION. There is but one question beforo the people of S'ilt Lako City in the coining coin-ing election of .luno -7th. That question ques-tion is not one of prohibition, not one of a "wide-open town," but simply a question as io who shall sell liquor here. Those who vote "dry," hoping thereby to get prohibition, arc absolutely abso-lutely prohibited by the law from getting prohibition. For, among tho many intricate, contradictory, confused, jumbled, uncertain, and unconstitutional unconstitu-tional provisions in the liquor law, the following section stands out clear and strong: Soc. I. Manufacturers. None of the provisions of this act shall bo construed as prohibiting or Intended lo prohibit the mnuufactura of Intoxicating liquors or the disposal I hereof at wholenalo at the place whore manufactured and any manufacturer manu-facturer 1 hereof shall have the right to manufacture and dispose of the same at wholesale at the place whore manufactured manufac-tured by obtaining a llcenso therefor and by complying wltli the other provisions of this act. and of all other laws of thia SHate relating to tho manufacture of Intoxicating In-toxicating liquors and tho salo thereof at wholcpalc. notwithstanding tho result of any election provided for In this act. In any voting unit created hereunder; provided, pro-vided, that no license shall be Issued to any manufacturer who was not legally engaged In tho manufaotura of Intoxicating Intoxicat-ing liquor at tho time of holding: any election elec-tion at which a majority of tho voters vote "against sale." That is found on pages 153 and J.5-1 of tho session laws of Utah for 1911. On tho opposite page, 155. a wholesale dealer is defined as a person, partner ship, or corporation which disposes of intoxicating liquors in quantities of not less than five "wine gallons, "except, to a duly licensed liquor dealer," whatever what-ever that ma- mean. The controlling fact, however, as that makers of intoxicating intox-icating liquors, including beer, wine, and spirits, having their establishments in operation at the time of the pas-sago pas-sago of tho law, are absolutely guar-anlood guar-anlood in that law tho right to manufacture manu-facture and sell intoxicating liquors. Tho liquor so sold may be drunk upon Iho premises, as Iherc appears nolhing in tho law against this proposition; so that every brewery can have a beer garden attachment, soiling beer by the keg, parties tapping and drinking a I their- will. And, since the right to sell is fully protected under the law, iu spito of any vote that tho peoplo may give, the right of promiscuous buying in lots of five gallons or more is also absolutely protected. Parties, associations, associa-tions, or clubs, can, under tho law, buy beer, wine, or spirits from the manufacturers manu-facturers and as such clubs, associations, associa-tions, or parties can tap and drink at their pleasure without interference; but, of course, they cannot sell. The party, association, or club that buys a keg of beer have to drink that beer themselves. To what extent clubs or associations can maintain headquarters and drink tho liquors thus bought without with-out interference, and whether thoy have to drink a purchnso all at one session, or can establish headquarters and drink from time to tamo and from day fo da', is a question that will probably havo to bo settled iu the courts. But the main thing lo be considered now is that the law guarantees many opportunities for the making, soiling, and drinking of intoxicating liquors, so that there is no question of prohibition prohi-bition beforo the peoplo of Salt Lako. It. is, as tho Descret News has frequently fre-quently pointed out, and as President Joseph F. Smith and other church speakers make prominent in their addresses, ad-dresses, merely tho banishing of the snloon. To down tho saloon .is all that they pretend any desire or intention to do. Tho purchase of liquor by clubs or associations, and tho drinking of that liquor at. the will of those who purchase pur-chase it, being fully guaranteed, and this without paying any license, the question naturally arises whether that would be an improvement over the present system. Indeed, so far as we can see, associations or persons might band together and have their headquarters headquar-ters in places that are now saloons, and go there and drink their own purchases pur-chases without any interference of the law, and without paying any tax therefor. there-for. It appears to bo an absolutely clear case, since the right of manufacture, manu-facture, sale, jind of purchase is guaranteed guar-anteed in tho law, no matter what the people may wish, as that desire may. be declared at the election, that, the only change possible through the vote that is to bo taken on .Juno 27th is a change in tho method of handling flic liquor traffic. Thoro is, first of all. as stated, the right to sell and to buy; tho right to drink on tho premises of the brewer-, or to deposit tho liquor in some place agreed upon by the purchasers, pur-chasers, with the right of those purchasers pur-chasers to go to that place and drink whenever they please. There, is, second, sec-ond, the right to buy and ship in by express or otherwise in original packages pack-ages any kind, or any .quantity, of liquor that anyone sees fit. Tho talk of prohibition, therefore, under conditions thus established by the law, is absolutely futile. The liquor trade can flourish just as much as beforo; men can get drunk even more than heretofore if (hey so wish, and the law throws its mantle of pro-tection pro-tection over them. Jt is simply, on the ono hand, a proposition to leave the liquor traffic as it is, and this result will be obtained by voting "for sale"; or, on the other hand, thore is the form protected by the Jaw. wherein the breweries and makers of intoxicating intoxi-cating liquors can sell by the kog or five-gallon package lb any purchasers, and those purchasers can drink that liquor at their convenience, either on I he brewory promises, or anywhero else in town where they may choose- to store it; or they may make it a point to drink it all at the time of purchase, and to load themuel es with a more profuso guzzling than thoy would otherwise oth-erwise think of doing. Tho Tribune does not desire to defend de-fend the saloon, and has, not dono so. It is not speaking for the "wet' nor for tho "dry." because wo arc bound to have it w'et iu any case, and cannot can-not havo it dry, no matter what wo may desire or may vote. Wc simply wish to state- plainly and clearly the case ns it is. The only question is, whether wc shall havo saloons rogu-' laled and paying a fair licenso .lo the city, or promiscuous buying aud drinking drink-ing from tho breweries, wiuories or distilleries dis-tilleries in Utah, or from "original package" shipments, with the probability prob-ability of morr and grosser drinking than over before known iu Utah, |