Harrison County, Missouri - Chapter 25: Local Option Election, 1921

At an adjourned term of the County Court, held on Tuesday, April 3, 1888, there were present Albert Reeves, Presiding Judge, and Jonn A. DeLong, Associate Judge ; W. H. A. Gillespie, Sheriff, and Wm. P. Robinson, Clerk. When, among others, the following proceedings were had : "In the matter of petition for election on local option: "Now comes John S. Allen, Sr., and others, and presents to the court a petition signed by 585 qualified voters of the County of Harrison, asking the court to order an election to determine whether or not spirituous and intoxicating liquors, including wine and beer, should be sold within the limits of said county, said election to be ordered and conducted under the provisions of an Act of the Legislature of said state approved April 5, 1887, entitled an Act for the preventing of the evils of intemperance by local option in any county in this state and in cities of 2,500 inhabitanis or more, by submitting the question of prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquors, to the qualified voters of such county or city, to provide penalties for its violation and for other purposes. And it appearing to the court that more than one-tenth of the qualified voters of said county have signed said petition and it is further proven to the court that there is no city or town in said County of Harrison having 2,500 or more inhabitants ; It is therefore ordered by the court that an election be held in said Harrison County on Saturday, May 12, 1888, at the usual voting precincts for holding general elections for state officers, to detennine whether or not spirituous and intoxicating liquors shall be sold within the limits of such county. Such election shall be conducted, the returns thereof be made, and the results thereof ascertained and determined in accordance in all respects with the laws of this state governing general elections for county officers. That all persons voting at such election who are against the sale of intoxicating liquors shall have written or printed on their ballots the words, 'against the sale of intoxicating liquors,' and those who are in favor of the sale of intoxicating liquors shall have written or printed on their ballots, the words 'for the sale of intoxicating liquors.'

"It is further ordered that notice of said election be given by publication in the Bethany Republican for four consecutive weeks, the last insertion to be within ten days next before said election."

"We, the undersigned A. A. Williams and T. B. Ellis, Justices of the Peace of Bethany Township, Harrison County, Missouri, and W. P. Robinson, County Clerk of said county, hereby certify that on May 16, 1888, we canvassed the vote of the various townships cast at the special election held in Harrison County, Missouri, on Saturday, May 12, 1888, for and against the sale of intoxicating liquor and find the following :

It appearing to the court from the certificate of the County Clerk and the two Justices of the Peace that assisted him in canvassing and casting up the votes given at the special election held on May 12, 1888, in Harrison County, Missouri, that there were cast against the sale of intoxicating liquors at said election 1,488 votes and for the sale of intoxicating liquors 1,036 votes, making a majority of 452 votes against the sale of intoxicating liquor, it is ordered that the said certificate of said Clerk and Justices of the Peace be entered of record and it is further ordered that this order showing the result of said special election shall be published once a week for four consecutive weeks in the Bethany Republican, being the same newspaper in which the notice of said election was published.

The Act of 1887 above contained a provision that if a majority of the votes cast at such election be against the sale of intoxicating liquors that it should not be lawful for any person within the limits of the county to directly or indirectly sell, give away or barter in any manner whatever intoxicating liquors or beverage containing alcohol in any quantity whatever, under penalties prescribed.

At the time of the adoption of the Act by the county and prior thereto the sale of intoxicating liquors was under dramshop license therefor, which of course was wiped out by the adpotion of the local option law.

But there was also in effect a law governing druggists and pharmacists which permitted the sale by them under written prescription of a registered and practicing physician given to an actual patient and it was thought by many that this permission was abrogated by the absolute forbidding clause above quoted, but this mooted question soon reached the Supreme Court for decision where it was decided, under the rule that laws made upon the same subject should be construed together that the local option law was not aimed at the permission of the pharmacist but only at the general traffic.

This local option was considered in force and prosecuted under for several years, but finally doubts arose as to the sufficiency of the length of notice of the required publication in adoption, and it was abandoned, and for a time prosecutions thereunder were discontinued.

But in 1899 another petition for submission of said law to an election was filed, and an order was made submitting the adoption of said law to such vote, said election was held pursuant to said order on December 9, 1899, and resulted in the adoption of said law by a majority of 652 votes, 1,445 for adoption and 793 against adoption, and it again became the law of the county and remained in force until the taking effect of prohibition on January 16, 1920.