The Union and eastern journal. [volume] (Biddeford [Me.]) 1854-1858, 1855-07-20

II "
dictator in the manner contemplated by the
Judge. If the Judge entertained such no
tons as he expressed. he did not leave the
bench q moment too soon. Tho Judge Is
learned in tho law, and thinks Il ,unconsti.
tutional because tho penalties arc not pro-
portioned to the offence. Now tho object Of
the Legislature in framing tho Law was TO
prevent the injurious effects Of the traffic,
and see what Judge Of some celebrity in
tho United States, has said with respect to
the power Of the Legislature In these mat
tors. Judge Tanney, Chief Justice Of the
Supreme Court Of the United States, in a
case presented, as to the power Of tho State
to restrain or prohibit the sale by law, says :
"ESery State may regulate its own inier-
nal traffic, according 10 its own judgment,
and upon its own views Of the interest and
well-being of its citizens. am not aware
that these principles have ever been ques.
toned. If any State deems the retail and
internal traffic in urdent spirits injurious to
its citizens, and calculated to produce idle
ness, yicc or debauchery, I see nothing in
the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES to
prevent il from regulating and restraining
the traffic, or from prohibiting 1t altogether
If II thinks proper" So
| I'VE think it would DO aboutas safe 10 rely
upon the opinion Of Judge Tannoy, as upon
that given BY our eI.Judge.l al'
Sec. Am Apo,hecary cap keop such
\ liquorsa rs arenecessary for tho prcparaiioh
Of certain medicines, but he is not allowed
TO sell them-if he does no is liable TO pay
a fine Of 5000 and costs and six months
\ imprisonment. Are they such miserable
creatures ,ha, they can't DO trusted! No
body bu, the agents con DO trusted. /
would advise the frs, man prosecuted, 10
carry |, up, and break down the whole law,
and the proper judges would decide tho
whole unconstitutional, because excessive
in its penalties. Have the law in my peck
et-any Of you may have ii; i don't value
il much. I'D.
[Apothccaries not allowed to sell their
preparations Of medicines. Well, II Is so
provided such medicines arc intoxicating,
but they may DO sold in any quantity, pro-
yided they aro not. Why did no, the Judge
give the reason why apothecarics alone should
have the RICH! TO make drunkards. Tho rea-
soning Of tho Judge in this matter is grossly
unfair.
Sec. 6.-dH such liquors brought into this
STATE for the purpose Of being conveyed
through his STAGE 10 places beyond It's bounds,
shall not be kept or deposited IN any city or
totrn more than "a hours-and IL so Kept,
shall be liable TO seizure and forfei,ure.-
The owner is citizen Of another state or
Province-he is unable to remove il Us the
law requires, of which no may be ignorant,
and the first he knows the liquor is seized,
and il condemned, forfeited. '.....
In some cases under this sec. Judges
would sit in jurisdiction over foreign jurs.
dic,ion, which they have no righ, 10 d.
The liquor deposited may be seized and
condemned, and the record would be made
up accordingly, showing the owner guilty
OF deposi,inS liquor for unlawful sale. al
though he had violated no law. Is that the
liberty Of which we boast. II is tyranny.
Sec. Z provides that no stage driver, en-.
pressmaii, common carrier, teanlster, or other
agent, shall carry from place TO place in this
state any such liquors. Suppose you have
obtained liquor out Of the state or Of some
agent, and on returning home in the homes,
possession Of it, intending TO use it for q
good purpose, but the very fact that you are
carrying it, is prima seie evidence Of in-
ten,ion to violate this law. You are stop
cd by man-Hsve you liquor in your
cask? wha, right have you 10 carry rum
about? Your liquors are taken and yoa
with IL. and you a:c condemned 10 suffer
the penalty. unless you can prove your in
nocence. That s tho Maine Law.
Sec. S.-This sec. provides for getting a
warrant to ransack your premises in search
Of liquors and the destruction Of them. In
the destruction Of liquors, do you not de-
s,roy the original elements You might
destroy Just so much money. Another prin-
ciple OF the honesty Of the law.
[Yes, Judge; and when you destroy The
gamblers implements, do you not destroy
the original clcmcnts-thc rags out Of which
were mado the cards, the ivory of the dice |?
You might destroy 50 much money!
Money, We have always understood, could
DO used for bad purposes as well rs good -
for example, to purchase gambling implc.
ments, 10 establish nuisances, and to pur-
chase liquors for illegal sales. The idea
that there is property in liquors kept for H.
legal sale, involves the idea that il is uncon-
sti,utional to destroy them. Judge Wells
inisrcntially denies the power Of the State
to destroy liquors. Let US present what
other Judges of the United States Courts
havo said. As to the power OF State to
order tho seizure, coniscation and dos.ructi-
on Of property OF any kind for tho public
good, hear Justice Mclean: r.-.
"7he Acknowledged police po,csr Of STATE
often erte,lds the destruction Of property. A
nuisance may DO abated."
Hear also Justice Grier: .....
"All laws for tho restraint or punishment
OF crime, for tho preservation Of the public
peace, health and morals, are, from their
very nature, Of primary Importance, and lie
at tho foundation Of social existence. The
exigencies OF tho social compact require
that such laws DO executed before and above
all others. II is for this reason that quar-
antino laws, which protect health. compel
mere commercial regulations to submit to
their control. They restrain the liberty Of
the passengers; they operate on the ship
which IS the instrument Of commerce, and
on its officers and crew and the rights Of
navigation. They seize ths infected cargo
and cast Il orsrJOdyd." 49,.
These authorities place the powes Of any
STATE to enact Law prohibiting tho sale Of
Intoxicating ldrinks beyond dispute: II pln.
ccs beyond dispute also, tho power OF
State to provide in such law, if necessary
for the public good, fos the seizure, conGsca-
ton and destruction Of property, .t