The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1855-12-27

times absolutely prohioltlng sales in Certain
districts. and for the violation OF these laws
this Court has sustained numerous convictions.
Gaming apparatus obscene books. &C. ara
prohibited BY our past and present laws No
copyri ,hl can exist IN a work OF immoral. or
obscene description. Ssory's Eq. Jur. sec
936. and it is general principle thai NUS
ances MAY be abs.ed. removed and DESTROYED
II Wend ESQ; , Daua, l56: B!xcd 5s4.
Ii Wend 3a7; II Pie. $50. le IL 1874.
Rich $50. IS How L. 5. Il, SIS. The as,
was the Wheeling bridge case, in which. al
though the interests Of Pennsylvania And
Virginia were involved. when declared NUS.
an.,t.. Is was ordered TO be abased. This VA,
certainly properly
Slavery was abolished in the northwestern
territory by the Ordinance Of 1877, Blsekf.
% l. Is SAID larse sums are invested IN DIS
tillerieS Trey are probably small ~ com
psri~cn 10 the money iavcS.ed IN the slave
trade wien il Was out lawed and declared
piracy. Property engaged in smuggling is
forfeited and frequently colEsea;ei.
Liquors. under certain circumstances. the
legislature have declared nai>auces. Does this
Court know that as used in common, they
DO not work hurt or danla-e 70 the public. or
O the public morals That they de not pro
dnce likeness. oaSrancy. and crimee Such a
conclusion involves an ahsurllss no less than
slsaf thi> Court knows tia. - be false which
tie re>. ot mankind know 10 be true
The az, Is said To interfere wlth nl-n IN the
pursuit Of happiness Tha. is avaSue term
which has no relation ~ relative rights or
lutie~- Allowing what Is claimed torit, there
would be an end ii the Criminal Code We
pro ibit marriages between " h}tcs and blacks.
anil make them f,lonie> I he Safe deems
the product Of such marriages aud Of com
merce il liquors an undesirable class Of per
sons and seeks to prohibit them.
\ distinction i taken between the regRla-
ton aud pro6ibifion OF traffic. and one pro
hihi,on Of sales to minors. drunken persons.
AMI Indians are called re ulauons. while II no
sales can be made j, i called prohibition.
One. II is admitted Is constitutional. while the
other i said not 10 be. This argument Las
great respects to the nights of the vender but
none 10 those of the buyer, whose unaiienable
rights are as sacred those of the former.
The same distinction is sought 10 be made
between retailing, which we have often pro-
hibited and who,esallns. Its difficult 10 see
how the mere choice of words can have
great an influence upon a man unallenable
tights. or how il is that he can have an I'M
questioned consti tntional right TO buy large
quantity, but no right a. all TO buy small
one.
1t is admitted by the appellant that the evils
resulting from commerce on liquors may be
regulated BY imposing tax for the license
The taxing power Is said to be unlimited, and
that it may amount to prohibition. Govern
inent is not mere theory II is useful only
as il Is practical. To deny men their rights
10 plain terms has al least the merit OF open
>traightiorwardness. If that cannot be done,
false prc'ense Of raising revenue, which
nj once sells inducements TO crime, and levies
tax To pay for it, is not means that will
sanctify the end.
The admitted powers to regulate induces
the power TO prohibit. ! kent's Com. ed.
43l. On this principle the embargo laws are
sustained
The law is said To operate unequally
certain classes Of citizens, The inherent i'm
perfection Of all human laws would render
them invalid, if this objection We're sufficient.
This point was discussed, and the fallaey of
the objection clearly shown, by the celebrated
proclamation Of President Jackson OF Deem
Der 10, 1912; which Judge Story declared to
be among the ablest commentaries ever offer
ed upon the Constitution. S:ory's Com. on
TIE Con. 1196.
The 5,h section Of the act providing for the
app intment Of agents 20 vend for purposes
article Of the Bill Of Rights. which declares
that '.the General Assembly shall not grant to
any citizen. or class OF citizens, privileges or
immunites which upon the same terms shall
not equally belo to All cifizens." II WAS
correctly insisted BY the appellant that the
agent was an officer. Whatever that section
may mean. il i evident that the privileges and
immuni'ics there menti3ne can have no ap-
phcation to offices or official duties, for the
plain reason that all men cannot be in office
The remainder Of the opinion discusses the
details Of the law, showing that the right OF
trial By Jury Is not taken away, but expressly
recognized; that il does not. as insisted, violate
the 18Th section of the All article OF the Con
stiu:ian, b cmboIying subjects foreign TO
each other; referring to the constitutional and
legislative history bearing upon tina. provision,
and Tat those poit'ons OF the act. whici
"a horize the appointment Of agents 10 manu-
fac,ure and send do moi conflict with the 23d
section Of tho 4th article OF the Constitution.
which r. quires ali laws to be Of uniform opera
ton ti,rougboui the ; a'e
The deals Of tie law above referred 10,
fol med the chief topic, OF discussion in the
first argument Of tie case, Of the part Of iiie
appellant. Tie opinion Of which the foregoing
Is an abstract was drawn up before the las.
argument was heard. which wa devoted almost
exclusively to the subjec Of the power Of pro-
hib ION. 4 press OF other duties has proven
led any material changes in the original draft
The conclusion upon the whole case Is, that
tie law 50 far as this case brings it before
u, j, valid throughout, and the julgmen: be-
low ought to be affirmed
exy Elder Knapp, formerly lamoas revi-
val preacher. is a farmer in the neighborhooi
Of Rockford, Illinois, with farm Of 1870
acres, s.ocked with cattle. hogs. horses. &c.
His land viii sell for s 10 an acre.
IL. Ga. nxS u IL .ltt..r IL tha liz.