Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1853-10-01

not against the eifect, the 'reSnltS,
but the traffic itself, "lhe sale'-and If these are
right, and dis Legislators have the power 70 say We
shall not sell on day ofthe week, or TO par.
hcddr person class Of persons, where is the pro-
vision that requires you TO stop here, and pre-
vent the sale on the other six days of the week,
10 any and all other persons7 Ifthere is any
power over tho traffic itself, u any estent, where
! is the line Of demacation, and who shall say VIII en-
that line is reachedi
! The truth is, the constitutional prov isions
makes no change in the power of the Legislature
over this business, except that il prohibits the
granting of permission to particular person to en-.
gage in il to the exclusion of others, leayuQ the
Legislature the same right TO sustain or abolish II
II found TO be detrimental TO the interest peace
of the community, which IL possesses over every
other trade, business or occupation.
| If the "evils resultngn from the lioRor traffic
are great that nothing short of utter and entire
prohibition will "provide againstp them, then il
is strictly and clearly within the Legislative pow.
er TO apply the remedy-if the "efect" cauret
be prevented without destroying the "csuse,"
the ''cause" must 60,
But to set this question entirely clear let us ex-
| anime the debates and acts Of the convention, and
see what was the intention and opinions of those
who proposed and those who opposed the provis-
ions on this very snbjeot. THIS mole is not now
in the construction of either constitutions or laws;
the intention of the enacting power is daily re-
ferred to by our highest Courts in the construstion
OF WORDS OIL donOtiul 1mpOrt-So that intention is
| gathered from their acts and speeches,
On the 3lst Of January, 1851, this clause be-
| ing under disscussin in the convention (see de-
bates, page 446), Mr.. Sawyer moved to amend
by striking out all after the word estate" and
inserting, in lieu, the following, "Rer shall the
General Assembly ever prohibit snch traffic''
this would have made the section read thus: "No
license TO traffic in intoxicating liquors shall
hereafter be granted in this State, nor shall the
General Assembly ever prohibit such traffic"
| Here then was the direct question. La a vote
on this there could be no mistake as TO the nten-
ton of the members of the conve ntion, or their
wishes on the subject Of debarrng the Lsgisla
ture of all the power over The traffic, II was de-
bated all day, aud upon the vote being takea it
stood, ayes l2. nays 6l-decisive euongh, in all
conscience, of the intention 10 leave the Iegis-
ature free 10 prohibit the traffic Unnecessary.
| ltis universally admitted rule, in the con-
sructing of statutes, to consder-frst, the old
law--second, the mschie--and third the rem
edy; aud can good reason why the same
test may notbe applied to ascertain the meaning
which is TO be attached TO ambiguous or doubtful
| Sc senteRees, when sue occur in a constitution.
shall, thorefo;e, avail myself ofthis mode of ex
amining the second part of what is called the
| Liquor Clause in our State Constitution,
Our old Constitution was silent the subject
Of the liquor traffic, as well as all other of the
different channels cfbusiness, and Legislature,
therefore, when il first introduced the license
system, as it has been called, did under its
general power to guard the public morals and
happiness. and if it were needlul to effect this
to restrain me in their otherwise inherent rights
TO an extent sufficient TO attaiu the oh ect sou ght
AT the time of the formation of the new Con-
stituton, the liquor traffic was under system Of
partial resistant, based upon the admitted fact
that It's unrestransd enjoyment was inconpata-
bic with the well being of society. Unlike all
other avocatons, the retail ofutoxio ating drinks
annE naIt Lee Nhnao pl
isfy our courts they were men of sufficient moral
character TO be entrusted with business dam
gerous TO the public peace.
There were, however, in this State, large
and respectable body ofcitisens who believed that
our General Assembly had no rightto dehar any
one from the free exercise of any business in it.
self night, or to legalizs traffic if that traffic
was tCrOng.
Thc- believe the liquor traffic came under the
latter category-that it was wrong; but as the
broad seal ofthe State gave 10 the traffic qausi
respectability, in eyes OF many. which its own
own merits did not deserve, they petitoned the
servants in the Convention TO take from it the
protection thus ofiorded, and leave it to stand or
fall, in public opinion, By its own unassisted ef-
forts and the benefits or evils which fellowedin
its train, In accordance with their petitions, the
clause now in the Constitution was adopted by
the Convention, a1d especially ratified by the
people.
This clause is by this time we'll known. 1t
provides that f'no license TO traffic in intoxicating
liquors shall hereafter be granted in this State;
but the General Assembly may by law provide
against evils resulting therefrom." And it i
upon the peculiar phraseology of this latter olaas
that it is claimed the Disability Of TIE Legislatur
10 interfere with the manufactere or sale of in
toxicating Liquors arises. .
Now the old law was, hcsnSe; the mischief was
that this license conferred responsibility or this
traffic which its intrinsic merits did not warrant,
and the remedy sought to remove this bastard
responsibility, and leave the traffic to stand or
fall as it might commend ITSELF to public opinion,
or merit its reprobation. And the odvocates OF
the measure must have been double distilled id-
ots to concoct and labor through an entire winter
TO procure the adoption of measure which would
remove the slight restraint on gigantic evil al.
ready existing, and at the same time place an in
separsble barrier to the substitution of any ether
restroining power. Still, il they have done so,
they must abide the event. ie~
deny, however, that such is the Gaze; and
snail endeavor to prove that am right in that
denial
1t will be admitted, suppose, that those
words mean someth iug-that they are operative
and confer some power to some extent on tho
General Assembly Of Ohio. Now, l assert that
unless they confer on the Legislature the entire
coutro ofthe traffic, so far restraint is concern
ed, they have no operative effect at all are per-
lectly nugatory, and from their generality, and,
~ SOih " WOTuJ III tduStDtcucSSJ dIo as VI
they had never been.
May provide againste evils resulting therefrom -
Now, suppose, with the Elgiiref, that an
tecedent ofthese evils is the ''lraic," 1t cannot
be 'license"-that is aboshsdi and, If yoa take
the words "intoxicating liquors" for ths antece-
dent, II amounts 10 the same thing as the word
'traific'' in this connection.
II is the "eVs resulting from the traffic in in
toxicating liquors, therefore, which the Legs-
lature is empowered TO provide against'' by law
But what evils--drunksnness--how merely by
furnishing the drunkard2 You have always done
that since liquor was invented. Or, must the
Legislature confne itself to providing ails for The
leOEs, assylums forthe lunatics, or poor houses
for the raupsrs by the ''liquor traeicl" Theae
was no necessity for special provision in the
Gonslitition TO enable the Legislature to do that
They have been doingit ever sinSe 0hio. was
5 tate
How then viii you makethsse words operative
and give them vitality for good2 By giving
them common sense construetion--oue com
mensurate with the evils "to be provided against
and which will protect society" against being
made ielons, paupers and iunatcs--shut ap the
OF these cxoresenees on the body
polite, aud remove the effect by destrying the
cause : IL the liquor clause in the Consultation
does not mean this il means nothing and SO tho I