The Spokesman-Review Newspaper
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper The Spokesman-Review
Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883
Current Temperature
58°F
Current Conditions
Overcast clouds
View complete weather report

Color Scheme

Subscribe now

This day in history: Federal judge halted 7 Spokane Prohibition cases. Zoo official proposed way forward for Walk in the Wild

Inland Northwest Zoological Society was struggling to raise money for the “Walk in the Wild” zoo in Spokane Valley, the Spokane Daily Chronicle reported on April 24, 1976. A former director, David “Kit” Beecher recommended that the zoo move forward in small steps instead of developing the whole zoo at once. (Spokesman-Review archives)
By Jim Kershner The Spokesman-Review

From 1976: The president of the Inland Northwest Zoological Society planned to recommend that the “society be dissolved and the (Walk in the Wild) zoo site be returned to its donor.”

The reason? A “lack of key major financing.”

However, the society’s former director had a different proposal. He said Walk in the Wild could still move forward if the society dropped its plan to raise and spend $6 million to develop the site all at once. Instead, he suggested that the society proceed with a more modest “phased development.”

That way, “the necessary $1.15 million of improvements could be made by mid-1982 to allow the society to gain title to the land” near Mirabeau Park.

So far, only about $120,000 in improvements had been made at the site. A general membership meeting was planned in May to discuss these proposals.

From 1926: Federal Judge Stanley J. Webster rebuked federal Prohibition officers and a U.S. commissioner for issuing search warrants in a “careless, slurring manner.”

U.S. Judge J. Stanley Mitchell halted seven Prohibition cases because he said warrants had been issued without out sufficient evidence, The Spokesman-Review reported on April 24, 1926. (Spokesman-Review archives)
U.S. Judge J. Stanley Mitchell halted seven Prohibition cases because he said warrants had been issued without out sufficient evidence, The Spokesman-Review reported on April 24, 1926. (Spokesman-Review archives)

At issue was a search warrant which resulted in the arrest of seven people for liquor violations.

Judge Webster said the search warrants were obtained improperly. He reminded the officers that the “accused is entitled to know who complains against him” and that the complainants must “appear before the commissioner and make affidavits or depositions.” Moreover, the warrants must be based “upon the facts,” and not on the “conclusions of those making the complaint.”