New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1854-04-24

VIZ - AN usLTAsosasIg sIARcnf It involves, slso
the ves'irg Of The poser somephere OF determining H.
reasonable search - much the creature OF as. mag
10 lie he'd by Legislation or decision If the Court
an, other legal fact Hitherto the Legi-leture has
exercised tie power Of determining Tbs question unner
TIA utes dwelling house or other building may De
scsuL for s.oleD property the complaint and "ah OF
srre witness II may be searched for me unp.s neie
# couAefiDg or for counfeiiet money eVea It1zn
h. occUraui be rot charged with the thei or Frh bang
G. unfs1fef Under health law, right 90 sc 'rch
j. much hrs guarded than tbs section UafeT the laws 81
CorfTtsf, sOTes, war, houses, d"eihng house or ho
buildings, vessels and sbs, may ," seschv ''r Sp'i
suugcled contrary 10 the resenue in~- ab"ehs me
or other building in which criminal may have eere'e
himself may be broken o@n aud searched by ths oaiesrs
IN rursut even without search warrant and IN some
Gees without any wsrJan; at all so far ~ Tie rea'oaI
III atss If the search HIN, is concerned this s@ctoD IS in
accordance with precedeD as CD as the sdu1e OoJ- VI
oOmpOn Law.
In regard TO the second proposition viz: That no war
rant slOuld Issue bat upon pJo6dtR cause tu1PTe1 y
"oob or r-otor II will be seen that By the section
quoted tie warrant only i-sue upon compliant 10
writing tLGt such complaint must be verihed ny the
ostbs o "two credible witnesses OF the town IL nus
state "the facts and ccumstaDces upon which the CON
Ileir IL founded. Tie sgstrste before whom the CON
sn is made weigh these facts and crcnm stances
md determine noiccisly the precise thing conen ei
BY he BIZ Of Ri hts viz Whether there 10 prrosble
"csu.e" for i.suing the warrant Of search In this re
erect We submit there il perfect harmony between the
section quo,ec and the BIZ Of Rights
In reference to the bird propO-Ono the Bill os Rights
as quoted VIZ THAT the places to be searched aud the
"tlngs to be seized should be deignsted ,he lection
uIGer ooDsdrton oxlIe'sy I.qores that The place TO
he sesrcheo sba abe cesiguG'ed ia the warrant 10 re
ourea also that shall degDae the things I, be searched
for and feized viz Intoxicating qu0Fs and ne veas
ain ~bioh they oobIsned' Ia bi- repect, also, we
submit that the section is in strict accordsnce with the
letter rs well ~ spirit ofihe Bill of R sbts
IL will thus be that this section Of the bill thus
vetoed !. in sirmence end in perfect harm'ny with ne
B OF Rsh;s IL does lot provide FIR any "HIreaso'abfe
"eorch Il does not provide for the ISSUING q va rant
"tui upon pyotaJh eGnse supported By oath or atrml
"tonf Il REQUIRES that the place 20 be searched aad
che thing TO be ..z.d" shall bee designated in the war
rant ard neither the II Of Rights nor he provisions Of the
Constitution # the United States require anything more
lie Governor secODd objection to the J-d secton OF
tie law, which read az follows:
{s2 pen re tra Any plant civil seton ae0ced
icertto sia II sytrLes of oDle@ fsl sale Whenever
nd i sole alleged add del''s{ po,ed ana, eot o.
bu soch delivery shali he snucieat
Rtv,n, ever pIpeipe of evidence taa justice" Proof
that is h,s sn,t o. eeyeid 70 az olnei 1' n'oA ,s
b. norf.ous tss inference eOnyics him Of Th9s h.
ro IF guilt be condemned une lie can prove h" ho'
We firm ihst tile section does such thing that it
creates 10 rule Of evidence does conflict with
tny old but is in strict accordance with princts
peieoy famiar TO every lawyer of decent standing ia
The profession in the State IL regard 70 the frat portion
Of he section which declares that "prOof of the sale Of
"licuor shall be sufficient 10 sustain averment OF
"lsiu sale will be remembered that this statute be-
gins with general prohibition against all sales OF ntoEi
Getting liquors II estab-bes general rule which N axes
sales il4ga II declares ALL salos unlawful l. then
makes certain pors To This general prohibition and
prov that under certain circumstances the sale may ne
lawful 1he general principle Of the law then is. that
mtnsial Rot sell intoxicating drinks. The exception is
Il Ut under certain crcumstance they mag sell The rule
sdOIe6 and affirmed by the portion OF the section above
duOild is simply and only that 1t shall be sufficient for
n prosecution 10 prove violation OF The general pro
hibtioD al affirmative Oftnse akainst the general scope
and OF the law, throwing upon the defendant the
Of defending himself by bringing has sale within the
exception. The ale being proved the ecneT prohibition
attaches The person prosecuted brings himself by his
proof within the exception ard his defense Is perfect
10 = efra.sr nriu. III Ia
prevailed for Centuries and Is in harmony with the theory
Of he common law Oh the subject of evidence.
In regard 10 the latter par OF the section winch pro-
vides iha when an unlawlu sale Is alleged and delv
"e proved it shall not be necessary to prove pm ment
but such delivery shall bo sufficient evidence of sale
THIS We affirm is no new principle, bat, the contrary
one ell Understood and applied every day in the Courts
brewer sues customer fer 4 barrel OF beer Sold nc
proves aGoSery be Gw implies sale, and he RECEIVERS
liquor INGREDIENT for cask Of brandy sold he
prove delivery the law implies sole, aud he receivers
grocery keeper for bottle of gin sold lac oveS
delivery the law implies sale, and he RECEIVERS lie sues
iiper fol half dozen drinks OF rum he proves dey-
ery The law implies sale and he recover Sach recOv
cry based upon plain simple rule of evidence perfectly
unde soOd by every lawyer which prevails III jac0T o
the brewer the liquor merchant md the grocery keeper
when they 10 pay for their liquor and 10
there any hardship anything oppressive or new in apply
ing il ogatat them, when they violate the law And yet
Gov Sey is horfed At the isea of applying 10 the
liquor vender of the simplest rules OF evidence known
10 every ro in the legal profession, and familiar 20 every
Justice of the lcaco AZ household words.
The Governor a.ks, in connection with this section,
wl security have citizens against the invasion OF
their homes by officers We ans ser the simplest aud
safest in the wordone entirely within the reach of every
man Lei them obey the Law Let them respect it. pro
liios and abide 10y its sanctions, and there will be no
daIger Tire homes of honest law abiding people are
not End nil not be invaded by officers Those who defy
the law ard nsis upon ing is provisions, should
not have the sympathy of the highest executive ocor of
the State nor they justly complain II they dis
/ tulbed by the officers Of the law.
Tie third objection is to the 18TH 4th and 18th sections
of the bill These sections" the Governor says, direct
ing they do tie forfeiture and destruction of liquors
unconstitutional Ii is declared in section 6, article
81 of the Constitution that person shall te deprived
"o life liberty property without due process Of Jaw.
In order to understand the force or rather the faacy Of
this objection the provisions of the sections referred to
should be clearly understood as well as those of the
ton immediately preceding them
sion. 9TH. sw shall sve notice in s.ns to the
hhe he found ofh seizure aescnbrs The liquor seized The
the ocr s,scesps it. and the residence Of both and the time
such seizure 1.-THE owner lot be fosnd then the notice 10
be left VITA residing the preaises
there be such person then 3, POSING sconspcuOS
on ,ss as Is. 'as : Be 3 s ss
and s
~ rssi:ss for he thai Of aay b. male before
ms.s,e wtS .se Vi. warrant Of :saa either With or With
tei mined is whether property seized tspt IN the pie.
where for the purpose CT 'sc contrary to the pro'
Jroyids from the judgment rendered upO
iii poyids ,ht il the action BE- decss against the e@.n
then the liquor seized shall be destroyed s-d the vessels IN as
In support Of the position assumed by the Governor tina
these provisions are the section ohe Con
stituon which provides that person shall be deprive
"Cf life liberty property, without due process OF law
is reerIed TO- The Governor in constituting this provision
aTse Supreme decided that da
Of sv usec IN the Coniseen cannot mesa s. than
ibec arc solemps fer aseersnins gait dserninia
hs TILE WI Ss .s ss s ~ pre-
pio1s sns If tie ater can be tslsn so0f for.0 'is
hist Judge has held this language m Whist case Of