Indiana American. [volume] (Brookville, Ind.) 1833-1861, 1855-11-23

not been prosecuted and abated also
What was the need Of this special Law
upon the subject? We have assumed
thus far, upon this branch of the case
that the constitution protects prlvat'
property and pursuits. and the use o
private property by way Of beyerag'
as well as medicine. II may be necessa
ry, at this day. TO demonstrate th'
fact.
The first section Of the first articl,
declares. that all men are endowed BY
their Creator with certain unalienabl,
rights; that among these are life. liber
ty. and tie pursuit OF happiness. I'm
der our constitution, then, we all bav,
some natural rights that have not beer
surrendered. and which government
cannot deprive us of. unless we forfei
them by our crimes; and to secure L
US the enjoyment of these rights is tn,
great aim and end Of the constitution
itself.
1t thus appears conceded that rights
existed anterior to the constitution
that we did not derive them from It,
but established it to secure to us the
enjoyment Of them; and here il be-
comes important to ascertain with
some degree of precision what these
rights. natural rights, are.
Chancellor Kent, following Black
stone, says: vol.2, p. /. 1.-THE abso'
lutte or natural rights Of indiyidual'
may be resolved into the right of per-
sonal security. the right Of personal
liberty. and the right 10 acquire and
enjoy property" not some property
or one kind Of property, but, at least
whatsoever the society, organizing
government, recognizes as properly
How much does this right embrace,
how far does il extend? 1t undoubt
edly extends TO the right Of pursuing
the trades of manufacturing, buying
and selling; and to the practice of us
ing. These acts are but means Of ac-
quiring and enjoying, and are abso,
lutely necessary and incidental IA
them. What, we may ask. is the
right Of property worth, stript of the
right of producing and using? "The
tight Of property is equally invaded
By obstructing the free employment oI
the means of production, as by vio.
lently depriying the proprietor Of the
land" says Political Economy. page
1888.
In Arrow Smith v. Burlinger, d Nc
Lean, on p. 497, it is said: "A free
man may buy and sell at his pleasure,
This rights not Of society, but by ma
tasre. He never gave it up. 1t wo'd
be amusing 70 see n man nunung tnro-
our law books for authority to buy OF
sell or make a bargain" To the
same effect Lord Coke, in 2 Inst. chap.
60, p. AZ. Rutherford's Institute. p,
30. This great natural right of using
our liberty in pursuing trade and bus
ness for the acquisition of property.
and OF pursuing our happiness in us
ing it, though not secnred in Europe
from the invasions Of omnipotent par
liaments or executives, is secured
to Tvs by our constitution. For.
in addition to the first section which
we have quoted. and aside from the
fact that the very purpose Of estab-
fishing the constitution was such secu-
rity, by Section II, Art. 1, it is declar-
cd that we shall remain secure in our
persons, houses, papers and effects,
against unreasonable search and seiz-
ure." BY Section 2l. we have the
right 70 devote our labor to onr own
advantage. and to keep our property
or its value for our own use, as they
cannot be taken from us without being
paid for. And by Section l2 it is de.
clared that "every man. for injury
done TO him in his person, property,
or reputation. shall have remedy by
due course of law" These sections
fairly construed. will protect the citi'
zen ia the use Of his industrial facul-
ties, and in the enjoyment Of his ac'
quisiiions. This doctrine is not new
in this court. In Doe, v. Douglass. {
Blackf. 10, in speaking Of the limita,
tons in our constitution upon the leg
islative power. il is is said, "They re-
strain the Legislature from passing .
law impairing the obligation Of con
tract, from the performance Of judi
cial act, and from any hagrant viola
ton of the right Of private property
This latter restriction. we think. clear
ly contained in the lst and cath sec
tions of The first article Of our constitu
lion" Of 1916.
We lay down this proposition. then
as applicable TO the present case: tina
the right Of liberty anil pursuing hap
piness secured by the constitution. EN-
braces the right in each compos menfi'
individual. in selecting what he viii
eat and drink: in short, his beverages
so far as he may be capable of produc
ing them. or they may be within hi
reach. and that the legislature canno
take away that right BY direct enact
ment. Ii the constitution does not 50
cure this right a. the people. il Sc
cures nothing Of value. Ii the peo
pie are subject TO be controlled by th'
legislature In the matter OF their bev
erages, so they are as 10 their article
Of dress. and In their hours Of sleepin,
and waking. And il the people ar
incompetent 10 select their own bever
ages, they are also incompetent to de
terminc anything in relation to thei
living. and should be placed at once il
a state of pupilage to a set of govern
ment sumptuaryoIlicers; .eulogies upol
the dignity OF human nature shoul'
cease, and the doctrine of the compe
.cncy Of the people for self.govern
ment be declared deluding rhetoric
al flourish. II the government ca
prohibit any practice il pleases, II Gu
prohibit tho drinking Of cold water
Gan II do that? II not, please tell u
why not.
live are right in this. that the con
stitution. .restrains the legislature fror
passing law regulating the diet |,
the people, u sumptuary law. for Oh,
i. II