The High Court Rules on 'Dry' Possession

It is not illegal to have any amount of intoxicating liquor in one’s possession provided it was legally obtained, is the ruling of the supreme court in the Eden-Boeing case decided last week. Judge Fullerton, who alone dissented from the majority opinion, declared that in his judgment the decision would practically nullify the indorsement of the permit section of the dry law and render the federal Webb-Kenyon law unenforceable in this state, the latter law having been framed to shut off interstate commerce shipments of liquor into dry territory. Thirsty ones who failed to lay in a stock before the dry law went into effect for fear of confiscation are gnashing their teeth. Meanwhile, reports from over the state indicate that the law appears to be giving satisfaction. The Spokesman-Review reports increased savings-bank deposits under the new order, and the Seattle Times, the leading newspaper to champion the cause of the wets during the election, has turned about to indorse the economic value of prohibition, devoting, in a recent issue, several pages in proof of dry prosperity.