On December 5, 1933 Utah became the eighteenth state to vote to repeal prohibition, and six more planned to do so. Word that Utah had ratified repeal reached Washington, D.C. a few hours later and shortly thereafter, the State Department and President Roosevelt declared an end to prohibition. Unusual for Washington, there was little ceremony when the President and State Department signed the proclamations, but there were celebrations in the wet states and some dry ones. Utah's vote had ended almost fourteen years of alcohol prohibition.
Local churches and other prohibitionist groups began recruiting speakers and holding public "dry meetings" around the county in mid-1935 to force another election to repeal the sale of alcohol in the county. They were unsuccessful.
Things pretty much "rolled along" in Titus County for several more years. Beer sales were still legal. Moonshiners continued to make moonshine whiskey, which was still illegal. "Revenuers" continued to raid stills and catch a few of the moonshiners, and life went on.
In the first nine months of 1936, Titus County collected $1,075 from beer licenses. Seventy-six retail licenses bought the county $12.50 each, accounting for $950.00, and two distributor licenses and one wholesale distribution license gave the county an additional $125. Most retail licenses were issued around the Talco Oil fields.
State-wide, by October 1937 rules governing liquor sales began to loosen. The Texas Legislature passed a bill backed by the hotel industry which allowed mixed drinks to be sold. This time the state became business partners with the vendors. The new liquor license, called a "dispenser's permit," cost $1,000 and the State collected 20% of gross sales receipts. Instead of the "for the children" argument, the estimated $2,000,000 annual revenue was earmarked for the old age assistance fund.
Traffic accidents and fights had slowly increased in Titus County in the three years since beer was legalized. With the discovery of oil in Talco in 1936, many more places had opened that sold beer, and many more places served it. In November, 1937, the County Sheriff warned managers of dance halls, road houses, and similar establishments to abide by state law and close at 12 o'clock on Saturday nights. Violations, which had previously been tolerated, would no longer be. The Sheriff said this was a step toward preventing "Saturday night brawls" that frequently occurred throughout the county.
On Monday, November 22, 1937, about 75 Mt. Pleasant residents met at the First Baptist Church at 7:30 p.m. at request of local pastors to discuss the spread of vice in Titus County and discuss what could be done to combat it. Believing that beer was directly or indirectly responsible for the lapse of morality in and around Mt. Pleasant, they decided that calling an election to end Titus County beer sales was the best way to start.
A committee was appointed to circulate a petition throughout the county requesting the Titus County Commissioners Court to call a special election to put the question before voters again. Mt. Pleasant Mayor Claude McDonald was elected chairman and Rev. Terry Wilson of Tennison Memorial Methodist Church was appointed secretary. L. W. Vance, Rev. George Moore of the First Presbyterian Church and Rev. L. E. Lamb of the First Baptist Church were appointed to the committee.
Committee members thought it would take time to properly circulate the petition, but when enough names were gathered it would be presented to the Commissioners Court for action. Only 190 signatures were necessary to request the election.
The following week, on November 27, the committee presented Commissioners with 500 signatures. Upon receiving the petition, Titus County Commissioners called for a special election to be held on Saturday, December 11, 1937 to determine whether or not to make the county "dry" again.
The "dry" camp knew they were in for a fight. Beer sales had been legal just four years, but the discovery of oil and the influx of new people who came to work in the oil fields had changed the county's political landscape. The honky-tonks that sprang up in the last four years disgusted many people, but many oil field workers supported them.
With just two weeks before election day, both sides had their work cut out. Since beer was legalized by only 11 votes and the political climate had changed since then, no one could predict the how people would vote this time around. No one knew how the majority of the new oil field workers felt about legalized beer, but no one doubted the election would be very close.
Prohibitionists called a meeting at Mt. Pleasant's Methodist church on Friday, December 3, at 7:00 p.m. to finalize arrangements for speakers to work for their cause. The public was urged to attend, and a good attendance of enthusiastic supporters was present.
Rev. Jeff Davis of Dallas spoke at Talco's Methodist Church on Sunday morning and at the Baptist Church that evening. Speakers assigned for meetings to be held around the county throughout the week were as follows:
Monday, December 6 - Maple Springs, Rev. P. W. Hightower; Sugar Hill, Rev. Jeff Davis; East New Hope, Rev. Jesse Davis; Hickory Hill, Rev. L. E. Lamb; West Midway, Rev. H. L. McNish.
Tuesday, December 7 - Nevill's Chapel, Rev. W. D. Hollingsworth; Argo, Rev. Geo. C. Moore; Liberty Hill, Rev. Albert Spence; Coopers' Chapel, Rev. L. E. Lamb; Union Hill, Rev. Ben Anderson; Cypress, Rev. Jesse Davis; Talco, Rev. Jeff Davis; Oak Grove, Rev. C. B Yeargan.
Wednesday, December 8- Marshall Springs, Rev. Terry Wilson; Blodgett, Rev. A. J. Findley; Winfield. Rev. L. E. Lamb; Farmers' Academy, Rev. H. L. McNish; Concord, Rev. I. E. Driggers; Gladewater, Mayor Claude McDonald.
Thursday, December 9 - Old Union, Rev. A. J. Findley; Ripley, Rev. Young; Adams' Chapel, Rev. Geo. C. Moore; Monticello, Rev. L. H. Raney; Cookville, G. H. Turrentine; Center Grove, Rev. B. L. Hatch; Green Hill, Rev. L. E. Lamb; Bridges' Chapel, Rev. Terry Wilson; West New Hope, Rev. C. B. Yargan.
Local citizens supporting prohibition accompanied the speakers.
Anti-beer forces held a final rally at Tennison Memorial Methodist Church in Mt. Pleasant at 7:30 p.m. on Friday as a climax to meetings held across the county.
Rev. Jeff Davis, head of the United Dries of Texas, was featured speaker for the occasion, and school children from around Titus County attended to talk about their attitude towards beer.
After the meeting, there was nothing else could be done before the election. Both sides had campaigned over the entire county and had distributed lots of literature supporting their views. However, there was very little talk around town about the election, which indicated that many people weren't passionate about how the election came out. A small turn-out was expected because only about 1,900 poll taxes were paid last year, and only people with paid poll taxes or tax exemptions could vote.
Many people were under the impression that the election's effect would be felt precinct by precinct instead of county-wide. In other words, many thought that if continuing sales carried in a precinct that it would remain wet even if others voted to go dry. County Attorney Morris Rolston clarified that if a majority of voters in the county voted to go dry, beer sales would be illegal everywhere in the county, regardless of how each precinct voted.
The ballot, while printed to exactly conform with Texas law, confused some voters. The ballot read:
FOR Prohibiting the sale of beer containing alcohol not exceeding four (4%) per centum by weight."
AGAINST Prohibiting the sale of beer containing alcohol not exceeding four (4%) per centum by weight."
The Daily Times cautioned voters that by scratching the second paragraph and leaving the first, they would vote against the sale of beer. If they scratched the first paragraph and left the second, they would vote to continue beer sales.
Polls were to be open from 7 a.m. until 7 p.m., and there was a much larger turn-out than expected with 1,716 ballots cast. All five Mt. Pleasant boxes voted to retain beer by a majority of 114 votes, and Talco voted 110 to 51 for beer. On the other hand, Marshall Springs voted eleven to one against beer, and Winfield and Green Hill also were strongly against it.
When the final vote was counted, Titus County voted to ban continued beer sales by just 14 votes, only three more than had voted to legalize it a few years before.
The Commissioners' Court had five days in which to canvass the election results, after which beer dealers would have thirty days to continue selling. Titus County would automatically become completely dry again on Saturday, January 15th, 1938, and another election could not be held for twelve months after legal sales were prohibited.
Even though there were no "dangling chads," the election was not without problems.
The ballot's wording caused considerable confusion, but was as fair to one side as to the other.
The Titus County Commissioners Court met in special session on Thursday morning, December 16 to canvass votes and perform a final vote count. They did not do a ballot by ballot count, but only verified tally sheets from the county's fifteen voting boxes. A vote by vote count could not be made unless someone protested the election results in District Court.
The Commissioner canvass showed that previously unofficial counts had varied by only four votes from the official count, which would not change the election outcome.
Beer dealers wasted no time in contesting the election. On Thursday, December 23, J. A. Ward, Bird Old Jr., and Holman Lilienstern, attorneys for Mt. Pleasant beer dealers, filed a petition with District Clerk Floyd Keith to contest the election results.
They contested the election on three grounds. First, they contended that Cookville election judges failed to sign voter's names on the back of the ballot as they were polled. If proven, Cookville's votes would be thrown out, meaning that the majority of thirteen dry votes from that box would be deducted from the county total leaving a dry margin of just one vote.
Second, a qualified voter in the Hickory Hill community stated that he went to the polls between six and seven o'clock in the afternoon to cast a wet vote, but found the polls closed.
The third allegation was based upon a Winfield woman's statement that she did not understand the ballot or how to properly vote when she went to the polls. She said she asked election judges to explain the ballot so she could vote wet, but later found out that they explained the ballot incorrectly and that she had actually voted dry.
A suit contesting an election was unusual because it had precedence over all other cases scheduled to be heard in the same court term. Therefore, this suit was expected to be the first case heard by District Judge T. C. Hutchings during the Court's January, 1938 docket. Court would convene on Monday, January 3, but the first two days would be devoted to charging the Grand Jury and appearance day. The actual trial was expected to begin around Wednesday, January 5 and was expected to attract more attention than any other case on the docket.
City, county, and state beer licenses expired December 31. Renewals could not be prorated and had to be paid for a full year at a time. The only licenses prorated were those issued to businesses that began selling beer after January first. Therefore, many establishments decided to quit selling beer on December 31 because they could not afford to pay a full year's license fee and possibly only be able to sell beer for two weeks.
Prohibitionists hired Vance & Maxberry as their lead counsel with County Attorney Morris Rolston to oppose the election contest suit. Texas law required Mr. Rolston to be made the principal of the election contest suit, and the other attorneys were hired to defend the election's validity.
Attorneys contesting the election amended their petition on Thursday, December 30 to include evidence discovered after the original petition was filed. The amended petition was similar in many ways to the original one. Like the original petition, it named C. H. McDonald as Contestant and County Attorney Morris Rolston as Contestee. County Attorney Rolston was also served notice of the amendment.
Late Saturday afternoon January 9, lawyers acting in behalf of the contestees (the drys) filed an answer to the contestant's (the wets) lawyer's original pleadings. The answer charged voting by persons in precincts in which they did not reside, and voting by persons who were not entitled to vote due to failure to pay poll taxes. No one would know how strong the answer really was until after the trial started, but it was reported to have considerably changed the wets' plans.
The trial was set to begin on Tuesday, January 11. Dry lawyers quickly won round one on Tuesday morning when they upset the wets plans in District Court by establishing that the man listed as plaintiff was not a qualified voter, and therefore could not act as plaintiff. When that evidence was presented, the trial was prohibited by law.
Lawyers for both sides agreed to reset the trial for Saturday, which was the last day before the law prohibiting beer sales went into effect. Before trial could continue the wets had to establish a new plaintiff, serve County Attorney Rolston with notice of contest again, and re-summon witnesses as though it was a new case. Pleadings had to be rewritten and reserved.
The suit had attracted more attention than any other on the Court's docket since it was first filed and every time that it was thought that the case would be tried the courtroom was filled to capacity with interested spectators. With large crowd normally in town anyway on Saturday, an even larger audience than before was expected to attend the trial.
Although there was talk of obtaining a restraining order to prevent enforcement of the local option law until the contested election was settled, beer sales in Titus County automatically stopped at midnight Saturday. The law was plain that while an election concerning liquor was being contested the local option law must not be suspended. The attorneys contesting the election did not file injunction proceedings on Saturday.
Unless the election was declared illegal, beer could not be legally sold in Titus County until another election was held, and the election could not take place until twelve months had elapsed since the previous one. Therefore, many people rushed to stock up on beer for future use on Saturday night, but no one could legally have more than 24 bottles on their premises.
All testimony and arguments were completed Saturday afternoon, January 30, and the case was given to Judge Thomas Claude Hutchings for a decision. Late Saturday afternoon, Judge Hutchings said that he had taken the case under advisement and would announce his decision "in the near future."
It was said that if the election was declared void that beer sales would immediately become legal after Judge Hutchings announced his decision. However, if it was upheld, sale of beer of more than four per cent alcohol by weight would be illegal for twelve months, and another local option election would have to be held and a majority of voters would have to approve the proposition again before sales could resume.
Judge Hutchings rendered his decision on February 7, 1938, ruling the December 11, 1937 election void due to excessive irregularities and ordering that a new election be held.
Attorneys for the drys decided on Wednesday, February 9 not to appeal Judge Hutchings' ruling. With that announcement, the status of Titus County beer sales reverted back like it was before the election and dealers no longer feared they would violate the law by making sales. Almost every place in Titus County that formerly sold beer resumed selling. Distributors began placing orders Wednesday afternoon to replenish their stocks, and began furnishing retailers with beer again.
Following Judge Hutchings' instructions to hold a new election, Titus County Commissioners ordered another county-wide election to be held on March 5th to decide whether or not to continue beer sales. The County Clerk was instructed to post notices in all precincts stating that the election would be held on that date.
Tax Collector J. T. Leftwich said he could have his poll tax list ready before the election date so election managers would know who paid their poll taxes. He also said it was not necessary for people over the poll tax age limit to have exemptions in order to vote, but those under age must have the certificates.
The next election would be held more carefully and election managers would strictly observe election laws. With approximately five thousand qualified voters in the county, both sides were expected to put forth every effort to win the election and a heavy turnout was expected, especially since it would be held on Saturday.
On February 17, 1938 an beer retailers circulated an agreement to close each Saturday at midnight and not to open again until 7:00 o'clock Monday morning. The agreement conformed with a State law requiring all establishments that derive less than fifty per cent of their business from the sale of foods during the week to close between those hours.
All dealers approached except one accepted the agreement. If beer dealers failed to observe the Sunday closing in the future, there was a possibility that state enforcement officers would file charges against them and might revoke their license.
To be continued…
