He still has possession of it. He still has the right to sell it. Nor is it claimed that he is deprived of its use generally. The only claim is that he is deprived of the privilege to use it for the manufacture of liquors for sale as a beverage . The absolute prohibition of the sale of intoxicating liquors is not contravened by anything in the constitution of the United States.
Sale is the object of manufacture.
Everything in this case indicates that the sole and only purpose plaintiff had in erecting his brewery was to use it in the manufacture of intoxicants for sale within the state. Plaintiff in error has only been deprived of a privilege which both by the statutes of Kansas and the common law, was always defeasible. The law was within the police power of the state. Prior to the adoption of the fourteenth amendment, it was conceded that the regulation of the liquor traffic was purely and exclusively a matter of state control. It is also competent to declare the traffic a nuisance, and to provide legal process for its condemnation and destruction, and to seize and condemn the building occupied.