The Richmond Indiana palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1854-1855, 1855-11-22

What regulations of the liquor business
would be constitutional, is not for Us 10 indi
cate in advance; but these which the legis!a-
ture may from time 70 lime prescrloe can be
brought by the citizen 10 the constitutional
test before the judiciary, and it will devolve
upon that department - decide upon their
consistency with the oTeanic law; in fact, the
question of power, of usurpation, between
the people and the peoples representatives
and in doing this. 50 far as it may devolve
upon US, we shall cheerfully throw every
doubt in favor of the latter, and OF stringent
regulations. Such IS tie constitution Of our
government Maize The State, 4 Ind,
342.-Thomas V. The Eoacd of Commission
ers OF Clay county. ) Ind, 557.-Greencaste
Township v Black fpi., 557-Larmer v
The Trustees Of Albion : Hill. 13l.-Dun-
ham y The Trustees of P@ehester, Cowden,
462.-Colter v Do.y. Heio Rep. 393.
1t is ike the case Of ifT-s for the collection
of debts. The constitution prohibits the pas
sage {. an act impsrius the obligation Of
contract; yet the leeisiias'zre may regulate the
remedy upon contracts but must regulate
within such limits as nd substantially to i'm
pair the remedy, as that would indirectly i'm
pair the obligation of t-s contract ITSELF
Gantly's Lessee V. Ewing, 5 How, [. s.
! Rep, TOT.
Regulations within constitutional limits, we
have no doubt, if efficiently enforced, viii ac-
complish, as we have sad, nearly all that caa
reasonably be desired.
The legislature. we wiz add, nav unioubt-
edly require the forfeiture Of such particular
portions Of the liquor s. shall be kept for
for use in violation Of proper regulations. as
in the case Of gunpowdar stored in popu-
lous city; and this forfeiture will be ad;ud ged
by the Judiciary; see Cotter '. Doty, .SuDra,
but neither all the gunpowder nor liquor in
the State. accompanied = he prohibition Of
the further manufacture and use Of the article,
can be forfeited on acconnt of the improper
use of given quantity. because the entirety
Of neither of the articles.is nuisance. II is
not pretended to be SO a. to sunpowder, and
We think we have shown il is not 50 as to IL
quor.
So i is doubtless competent for the legisla-
t'lre to establish proper police regulations il
prevent the introducing IF foreign paupers.
&c, for there isa palpa0ie difference between
excluding foreign: and expelling a citizen
pauper. The constitution i convention thought
II might have the power to prohibit the in
gress offoreign, while It Llight not compel the
egress Of resident, n 5ro4s.
So, by suck regulations may the introduc-
ion of nuisances be prevented; for there is
wide difference between. assuming 10 declare
that q given thiag IS q nuisance, aud the pro-
hibldng OF The introduct n Of what is concs-
ded, or shall turn out TO he nuisance.
And, in fact, the restri tions in the consti-
tuition upon he lesisla.i@s power may operate
fo~ t.e 5ss.ei-- u Il ss5 4 i:1 uIQer, and IN
some sense party to It's provisions, ana not 70 r
that of strangers. l. VIII not be dehied that
but for the constitution and laws OF the Uni.ed
States which impose the restriction, tho STATE,
as an independent sovereignty, might exclude
from her borders all foreign liquors, whether
nuisances or not, unless, indeed, TIE doctrine
upon which Great Britain was defended in
forcing trade with Ch;nS at the caunon's
mouth be correct, that in this day 81 Chris.
tian civilization, it is the 4uty of all nations
&c admit UNIVERSAL reciprocal trade and COM
snerce, a doctrine not yet we think, iacorpo-
rated into the code Of international Isw.
And it would not follow that because the
State might prohibit the introduction of foreign
wheat. She could. therefore, prohibit the cul-
tiyation of il within the State bv her own cit
liens. The right Of the State to prevent tie
introduction Of foreign objects does not de-
pend upon the fact Of their being nuisances.
or offensive otherwise: but she does it, when
not restrained by the constitution or laws OF
the United States, in the exercise Of her soYe-
reign Will.
This. however, is a topic involving ques-
tons of power between the State and Federal
Governments which We DO rot intend discus
sing in the present opinion. We limit our
selves here to the question Of tie power of the
Legislature over the property and pursuits Of
the citizen under the State constitution The
restrictions which We have examined upon the
legislative power of the State wsre inserted in
the constitution to protect the minority from
the oppression Of The majority, and all from
the usarpa.ion Of the legislature, tie members
OF which. under cur plurality system OF cleo
tioae. may be retained By minority u the
people. They should, therefore, be faithfully
maintained. They are the main safe guards
to the persons and property Of TIE S.ats.
It is easy 70 see that when the people are
srnaFtin5 under the losses from deprecated
bank paper. a feeling Nigh; be aroused tha.
would, under our plurality system, return
majority TO the Legislature which would de-
clare al banks q nuisance, co-.fsc.se their pa
per, and the building from which il issues.
So with Railroads, when repeated whole
sale murders are Perpetrated bv some Of them.
And in Great Britain anl France We have
examples of the coniscatipn Of the property
Of the churches even: which, here. the same
constitution that protects the dealer in beer.
Legislative power.
Ii our opinion for tAe reasons given above.
the liquor set Of 1855 is void. Le. the pris-
oner be discharged.
MORE GUANo-An American sea csptsin
has made q discovery Of guiana island in