The New York herald., 1866-06-15

ness for drink being restrained II he yield TO his
favore passion in the presence OF his fellow beings
who is obliged to continue in secret the vice. which the
law does allow him the opportunity OF indulg'ng IN
pubc While do not intend to Withstand public senti-
ent IL II has set itself against the urrestrained right
tO sell liquor-while certain amount OF difference ID
ever to what is said TO bel public decency-s the
suggestion OF place improper that the very pas
sion which he soealled temperance men seek TO erdi-
cate may be extended AM augmented by the means by
which they propose attaining their endY Looking upon
the present law fanatca In its spirit arbitrary in It's
provisions and unjust in its consequences-as hKely,
sooner or later political degenerasy koepe on 70 De
como source Of patronage or an engine OF oppre
sion-it should in our judgment, be promptly nuined
on this OCCASION unless its validity is dsncumbered OF
Mr. Charles Tracy followed In an argument in favor Of
tho validity OF the law As 10 the law being fanaca
noiarous e P2litl0 - its design as imputed a. BY MS
or counsel this case The only subject TO be discussed
was it's consttutonaity. What one man thought fanat
cal another man might regard In different light and as
to the political character Of the Legislature he would
only ask how that could be avoided Under our present
system Of government how could there DO legislature
unless II was political in some way or 0therS II any
plan could be devised by tho for defence to avoid
il he would Ike to hear it. What was the real ques
ton and difficulty in the casef The chief point raised
by the plaintiff was that the Excise law violated con-
tract made he. himself and tho State Mr. Holt did
not into court defending civil criniina! suit
but as volunteer on the equity side seeking equitable
state Ind violated its contract Mr. Holt presented
queer spectacle In court OF justice He went volun-
$3.50 for il and took It away showing that he wns in
earnesl in his CONDUCT Whht did this provcs Why
thai he renowned his old iiccnsc The counsel for
plaintiff had said good desi about contracts. What
conractsS They were agreements to which thor3
werc two parties; in this tho State party
and renounccd its side Of the contract By repeating the
old Excise law, and Holt the other party who had
Also counsel ooncnded renourced his side Of the
tract by accepting new license This wcs clear
principle of law. Again, tho law not mere
tanatcal measure intended to deprive people Of their
property, but merely TO regulate them in the use OF
it, The State had perfect right to regulate such use,
and nothing clearer than the principle that no man
could his own properly 10 the injury OF others
A man might a fast horse but had
right to drive it furously in the thoroughfa-es
There a very broad distinction between de-
prlvng OF his property and prescribing how
he might 1t. The discussion really before tho
the actual right of the State TO enact excise
law law which in truth had been acknowledged and in
force from tho formation almost Of the SaLo and colony
of New York. As to license being vested property MIR.
Tracy argued that IL -as, the contrary thing re-
vokable its very naslrc, and cited number of ai
thores in proof. The most striking case quoted was
that of the corpora,on OF the Brick church, which had
been granted tic Of certain groand forever for
cemetery. Whe the city ordered tho removal of the
cemetery tho church set up perpetual deed but the
court held that tho deed of avail against the will
of the city authorities and the cemetery was therefore
removed MIR. Tracv argued at much length several
other points, and concluded aor three O'Clock in the
afternoon.
The case was thon adourned until halfpas ten o'clock
this morning