The daily Gate City. [volume] (Keokuk, Iowa) 1855-1916, 1855-11-08
THE PnOHEBITOBY LIQUOR Law.

The State Of Iowa

| t3EoFAs SAXro ct. al. Liquors, dc.
! The proceedings in this cause are founde,
/ upon the 9th and 10th sections Of the lat,
act for the Suppression Of Intemperancc, an,
come up on an appeal from the Mayor'
Court of the City of keokuk.
Three classes Of objections are interposet
| by counsel for the defendants 10 the proceed
ings.
The LIST, denying the jurisdiction of the
Mayor over otfenses Of this description;
| The End, founded upon certain alleged ir.
| regularitles in the proceedings
| And the 3D., that the law authorizing the
proceedings Is unconstitutional and inopera-
tive.
| With reference to the first of these obiec-
| tons, it was claimed that although the city
| charter conferred upon the Mayor the powers
! ana jurisdiction Of justices Of the peace over
ofenses committed under the criminal laws
| OF this State, yet that this proceeding was
| one IN rem, under the 9th and 10th sections
| OF the liquor law, which was claimed to be
distinct from and unlike to any form Of pro-
ceeding under the criminal law of the State.
winch latter deals with persons and not things,
| and that therefore the Mayor could not en-
tertaln jurisdiction from any power derived
from the city charter.
based upon the idea that this proceeding is
one strictly in rem. This is conceived to be
/. mistake, and the objection must fall to the
ground The legislature has not been guilty
| OF the follyof declaring by enactment thu
property or things can be tried and punished
for criminal offences.
| proceeding under the 9th section Of the
act in question cannot be instituted without
charging some person by name with the offense
| intended to be punished, and when the pro
hioIteu article is seized and put under the
| custody OF the law, it cannot be further dealt
with TIL the person charged az well ae all
other persons interested are summoned and
notified to appear on a day designated for
trial. II they appear, they may plead and
have trial, and If found guilty as charged,
| they are punished by a forfeiture of the
goods seized and the costs Of the prosecution
ii they do not appear, a trial Is nevertheless
to be had, and some one must be found guilty
OF ayIoiatlon of the law, before the proper
ty can be adjudged forfeited. SO that ii is
trial OF persons and if the oifenses described
IN the 9th, 9th. and eth sections Of the act.
could be tried before the Mayor (Which
seemed to be conceded, and properly so, be-
cause the proceeding would be against per-
sons J, then it must equally follow that the
Mayor should have jurisdiction over The Of
Tense intended TO be punished bv this pro-
ceeding.
Again: The want of jurisdiction " az urged
IN another form. 1t was clalmed that il was
derived from the complaint duly made ac-
| cording TO law, and that inasmuch ~ one Of
| the persons making this complaint was a con-
stable, 1t should have been rejected under the
laoth section Of the Code Its quite obyi-
Gus TO the mind of the Court, that this Sec
uon OF the Code can have no application to
'nfo-mTt'on made und,- oath TO ma~iq,ratos
mat an odense has been committed against
the Criminal laws Of the State, but on the
other hand it is made the duty Of oil persons
having knowledge Of the fact, to give nfor-
nation OF the commission Of crime and in
the manner prescribed BY law, as the basis Of
prosecution.
lhe irregularities complained Of are gen
orally overruled. 1t is not deemed necessary
~ recapltulate these objections, ana TO state
ne several grounds upon which they were
oFerraled. 1t my answer TO state generally.
mat some relied upon in argument, were not
assigned as error in the affidavit bringing the
cause up some were groln1less: o .hers were
cured b. ;he verdict Of the Jury; and others
again were technical, anu did not affect the
substantial rights of the defendants
Some seventeen objections are taken against
tue validity or constitutionality of the late
liquor law under which those proceedings
We're instituted. Many Of these, however. are
directed against the wisdom anu expediency
OF the law, with which the court can have
nothing to do, and therefore will not be no.
| tieed. Those mainly relied upon as affecting
the eonstitutlonality Of the law, are,
LIST. That the a in -, 80
Yention of the 10Th section # the Sd article
OF the constitution, which says that "Ererq
ldu shoH embrace bat one object, eilirh Sh al
! De expressed IN the title"
Il Il claimed that this law possesses two or
more objects, one for the suppression of IN
temperance another regulating the sale of
intoxicating liquors by county agents; and
Yet Still another, for holding an election By
the people; and that the first Of these OBJ
jects alone Is expressed In the title.
ms provision Of the constitution was IN
tended chiefly To guard against two evils !:
~. An unfair expression Of the Legislative
VIII, arising from the common practice Of
passing balls hastily BY their title only, with
out requiring them to be read at large. and
"lheh not unireqaentlv embraced objects en-
Hreiy foreign TO that expressed in the title !.
aha, indy, 10 prevent surrcptitious leeisla-
ton by linking together two or more distinct
subjects OF legislation in one act, and there
ny giving an united strength which they could
not command singly for adoption.
10 pass laws which shall contain certain
limitations and exceptions to the enactino
clauses thereof, is necessary and n ;usl
mode OF legislation, often indispensable, and
long practiced without complaint, and is not
ah esii against which the provision of the
constitution alluded TO was directed. Now
tne aet under consideration prohibits under
Clearly Defined penalties, the manufacture and
saie OF Intoxicating liquors, crcept as there
/ IN propided. This exception nerm;ts thonso