New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-08-30
New91ork DAILY Gribnme
LIQUOR PROHIBITION.
JUDGE RoCKwELLs OPINION.
TIE LAW CONSTITUTIONAL
SUPREME COURT

The People kc Philip Bsrberich-T c. GanPsh and y
Thop,on for People; j. r. Barnard and d. A Nelson Tor
ROCKWELL 1.-THE defendant has been convicted
before Court Of Special Sessions held by the County
JUDGE Of Duchess County of having sold intoxicating
ouor in violation Of the act for the prevention of in
temperance. pauIe rism and crime, passed April 9,
1895 II ia claimed that the defendant should be dis
charged from custody.
/ Because so much of the said act as prohibits the
,aIe OF intoxicating liquor is void That sdoh prohi-
bton is an Unauthorized invasion of private rights,
and violation of the fundamental law.
Ills clear that under every free Government there
are certain fundamental and inherent rights belonging
to individuals which are not solely dependent upon
the will of the legislature and II 10 unnecessary 70
examine the written Cor stituton Of the State 10 ascer
tain whether they expressly shielded by that lnsuu
mept from Legislative encroachment. The rlgnis Oh
personal security, personal liberty, ana private
property Go Lot depend upon the Consutuuoh ior 'ne
existence They existed before the Constitution was
made or the Government was organized. These are
what are termed the absolute nights OF individuals,
which belong 10 them independently OF al G1vern-
ment and which all Governments, that derive then
uovers from the consent of the governed, were Istl
tuted 20 protect. They defined as follows; " By
the absolute rights of individuals we mean those which
are 70 in then primary and strlces, sense suSa as
would belong TO their persons merely III state Oh ma
ture and which every entitled TO ENJOY whether
ON, ~ society or in i'll Blackstone Com. l23.
But while these rights are better protected, they are
not Is entirely absolute under Government as III
state Of nature They are subserylent TO suc1 mas
ures as become necessary tor the preservation V tle
Goverpment is defense against external or internal
enemies or the promotion of the best Interests oil the
whole community. For the protection oil the doVerh
nent a. ainst external danger individuals may DC cou
PEELED 10 enter the military service, anu 10 supecl anu
fxpose themselves 10 the hardships and pers OF war
For the protection OF socety against the consequences
OF crimes offenders may be deprived OF liberty, prop
erty or life. Lunatics who become dangerous 20 o'h
ers nav be Imprisoned. Persons sick of coutagfouS
diseases may be removed 10 and placed IN no ptas
PropeIty may be removed destroyed, or trades sup
messed which endanger the public safety or ne alta.
Property may be taken from ndiVlduas IN me iorn VI
ta.es az d applied toward the support OF he Govern
uent and is institutions In short, Government Is
not 10 lie restrained in the exercise OF It'd Legitimate
powers, which essential 10 the public welfare De-
cause the rights of individuals Wiz be inJurousiy
affected thereby.
In cases where private property is directly and spe-
officially taken for the public use, compensation must
he ade 10 the owner But cases are constantly occur
ring where individuals are suoectei 70 great a1d
ous o ses OF property through the operation OF pubic
measures and laws; bat these Losses beng merely con-
seoueLtia snd ni denrs 10 the ex rcise OF The legi
mate powers of The Leg ssture the individual injury
IA no. The subject o. legal redress. Individual LOSE ire
on nly results rom TIE grading Of stres, he consruc
ton OF eanas bridges ferries railroads, and similar
improvements but II the lsw-making power IN the ex
erce OF its legitimate discretpa decides that 81 "a a.
rrUV
yiduss whose injuries consequential merely will be
pelmittsd 10 arrest the action OF the GoVernmen or
will even be entitled 10 comps nsaton Tor he Injury
which be nav sustain. Radchff's Executors We The
Nayor &c. of Brooklyn. ComssOcks ReqoI ., ls1.
We nsy assume for the purposes of this case, q,
ess, that the Legislature OF tree state Is no. CON-
petent b psss tyrsDDicaI law that ~ one which re-
strains the natural rights Of individuals tor any other
purpose than 70 advance public good or ~ rertss
some public evil Tie distinction between laws winch
are iyannical because they sary Infringe upon
he absolute rights of individuals, and those winch re
consist, Mt with civil liberty although In restraint OF
natural liberty, is very clearly pointed out by Black
sione, a. follow:
aPdities or civil liberty which hat Of a member Of
eefy . 10 other bery far restrained By human
turber necessary AMI e1Ped, q ~ nc ssa
sdvanisge 4 the pubic Hence We may eose tlat tae
1ers dinbss the nsrual, increases tae evil
cry snInd hut th.r every vsron .ad ss,r.'n
uoh y or popular assembly, eesree Of tyranny nay,
hs avs The selves, they -gza,e srd e1nstr-a our
conduct Of nd1ererce, without say goa
ed In view are resu aoIs desrzc Of liberty whe-e..
auy pubic advantage arse 1m obsrsIg such prsce
the ooutro Of pvs,e inelinsons two particular
points vii conauee 10 preserve or genera freedom " ocei ~
1r, by supporting that stale OF sociefy winch alone
csn secure our sde pendsnee-f a Blsckst0nes Com, lS)
There Is 10 doubt that great number Of ln1i-
yduas will sustain serious lo-s Of property and de-
ran, euent OF business through the operation Of the
prohibitory feature of the law in question. But this
consideration DO; decisive OF the question OF eysli-
i've competency. The question s1l remains: as
The passage OF the act exercise OF the legitimate
dscretion and power Of he Legislature founded upo1
cor siderst0ns Of public policy toudng 20 promote the
morals the health and safety OF the community or
was wslon and unnecessary INV sslon Oh ne
| private rights Of individuals
Any Interference with he III. OF property n no.
ite primary otsee; Of the sv Iis oblec; TO pre-