| OCR Text |
Show I DENVER CHANGES H PROHIBITION PLAN H9 phi'.hh.'sih rnniinu AIHH'MIINT M .TO HPhTAIN fONTF-VI ION. Hl Argumeuta Pnx'iilotl lly t'ounol Tor Hl dm Mnto Coiiti'iul Tluil Common- H wealth In Supremo In All Mutter) Hl of I,"gllulloii DcvMou liMMHlcri Hl Some Time During dining Month. H DHNVKII. Colo. Nov. J J. Tint olt) S irf Denver nml tho, state of Colorado Hl will present no further arguments (it H the supifltie court In the eaae In- H vulvlng Colorado's iirulillillliin loglslu- H lieu, according t mi minoiineehiciil H mudn toitiiy nt'tho nltorney general's H offleo. Tin change In plana was H made publlo Hhortlx before tho hour f for (ln court (it convene. Hj Arguments presented ly rouuacl fur H t lit elate oontended (hnl tin' slate U H mipremc In nil unit torn of legislation H hiii) Unit n city linn no more right (o H nut Independent!) of atuto llilur legls- H lutlon (linn In fix niiinlrr ponultlea. H Counsel for (hi? ilty urKiu-il that olllaa HJ governed u ml it special I'luirlur poa- H mm "special rlghla" In the regulation H of (hi. liquor truffle. Tha nine U now H before llm court, printed hrlefa hnv- H lug previously been filed. Hl TIik ootirt took orlKlnnl Jurlsdli lion Hj In (ho mac lo determine whether tin M clly authorities -if Denver poaoeeM tho n right In Ihu saloon licenses extend- Inir hoy oinl January I. IvKl, Hip dule H Colorado's constitutional unci statu- H tnry tirohlhltlon enactmciita become B effective, A decision U looked for In H December. |
