The Evansville daily journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ia. [i.e. Ind.]) 1848-1862, 1855-12-22
DECISION ON TIE LIoUOR LAW.

7
AT last we have decision on the Liquor
Law by the Supreme Court if that may be :
called decision in which every Judge ex-
presses an opinion for himself and each one
totally differs from the other. Below we give
brief editorial announcement from the Indi-
annapolis Republican of Thursday evening. In
it are two statements we do not know how to
reconcile. 1t says--"The effect Of this de-
cision is to prohibit the sale by any person ex
cept for the purposes named in the lato"-that
is for medical and mechanical purposes. 1t
afterwards says-"1he question as to whether
retailing as a beverage is unlawful, is open,
the Court being intellectually" This mixes
up the matter. But here is the Republicans
article:
TEMPERANCE Law DEc1sIoN-The question
as to the Temperance Law has been decided
by the Supreme Court this day. The Judges
all four, deliver opinions. Gookins sustains
the entire law. Stuart sustains all of it that
relates to the prohibition of the traffic, and
holds void that relating to the manufacture;
holds, also, the agency clause void. Perkins
holds the entire law void Davision concurs
with the majority of the Court in discharging
Beebe. aa se Is
The effect of this decision is to prohibit the
sale by any person except for the purposes
name in the law. Any one may sell for those
purposes. The manufacture is not prohibited
The question as to whether retailing as be-
verage is unlawful, is open, the Court being
divided equally. ,lfs
We will give further notice tomorrow.
Since writing the above, we have received
a State Sentinel of yesterday morning. The
following is its account of the decisions. Ii
considering the Sentinels summing up, du
allowance win be made for its prejudices agains
the law: aa-
The judges Of the Supreme Court yester
day morning read their opinions on the con
stitutionality of the Prohibitory Liquor Law
There are three opinions, all of which ar
quite yoluminous. We understand the fol
lowing to be the views of the Judges
Judge Gookins sustains the law in all it
parts, and declares it valid ,-sss ias g.
Judge Stuart holds the law to be constitu
tional excepting those clauses which prohibi
manufacturing and which authorize the es
adjustment ofagencies 2. eaat1 20
Judge Perkins holds the law to be uncon
stitutional and invalid in nearly allits essen
tal parts. Ills views may be learned from M
published opinien in the Hermann case.
Judge Dawson concurs in the conclusion
Of Judge Perkins. -A@A -..
We presume the effect of this decision Is
far as the opinions can be calleda decision
will be to authorize the manufacture and sci
ing of liquor by any and all persons for th
purposes named in the statute. In fact, til
enforcement or non-enforcemento the law wi
ina great measure depend upon. the views
the several Circuit Judges - - 60 zTn
It's to be regretted that the court were III
able to comic 70 d more united opinion as
the validity Of the law, as the varying view
wall tend to confuse the matter and give ris
to disputes as to what may and what may NJ
be done under the opinions of the judges
There can be no doubt however, but tn;
the law, in its most essential parts lis MULTI
ed. s@a .sitaea sfrslisa = g fsata- saasl e p