New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1866-09-29
TIE EXCISE LAW,
Arguments on 70 Yesterday Before the Court
Of Appeals,
special dispatch to The \. y.TribuHe.

T.
In he Court Of Appeals The following cases:
Mefopoa1 Board Of Heatt respondents agt John Barrie
appellant The Same rospoudeh agt John r. Carrier appel
laut Johr Barrie appellant agt Shuliz al. rcspordents
william Berle appellant est The Same respondents this
morning up for hearing before the Hon Henry Davies
CLiet jr'se Treal-k aod lodges Wright Porter Hgut
Leoln4. Fsedan, Morgan and Smith. Messrs. Fithinn
C,rs 200 s1ith Tor sEpelauts MFsrs. Chas Tracy and
Coo DBL o. rsrc1icntt.
iata go 'l.e l.''ed 'hs respondent. are se Metro
10 the csc. p. ror o 10 Judgment Of The General Term
Of 8. rr. 't I.e, Fee1 against the defendants
penslucs o. r s.'3.y ilu,-s &c. without license,
Carrie c.s, , t :, :. . ssser Re Jealer
hoensc would No. ezir by be- terms ull uo sl5se4l
In the lt tvo cass he parties dealing IN liquors &C..
appeared llts and rolgtt Judgment % rstrsin tie
Titan EK,e Law agl-stthe 10 cay and 20 declare
me law vol Tie Court gave Judgment against the paini s
ofh9 Ez.s, Liw of A9- IT, -dG Mr. Clinton stated thst
be va c-ls hr 500 Cure alone and asked that that case
might lo bend npalf from tle 0.aers.
District At,g Morris stated tat lo understood that 3r
IN his c... 0at i.. be- aos he COM " ,lfr number Of
oases r t' Ca below aad that 4o dsc.i.91 q h case
tse Cogr- b'o 90 those casa ana be was willing that be
Mr. Iilsa 0ae-sl tie clso for tle appell1 By stating
that these before che Court under ls provisions Of
vefsy ,. m Slej e sS5-s II IN ma Csc
compiled aity Hi.A me requirements o. ne code N
verJ la understood t4 E reason Of tAe offensive uga
ton tlet M grown oat Of le e4orcentIt cf te provisions
Of the Excise Jaw Of scs and ~ TIE purpose Of as speedily
as possible procuring d.,sou Of tie numerous questions
that stst1t, and which hsd become exceedingly burden
some not oay T. tho authorities Of TIE City Of New York
chose whom he ls rei.rrea these bad been agreed
spJn Is s15 o. tao oi3l Of re 1olrt ne qaetoe IN
DISPUTE Six originally agreed upon but only four
cHd be- bcy, M an s ponts embraced In those Tour cases
could bs lI wti su1li.'c1 in ons argument
10 tL' Of join Dar-o against Jaokson s shuz and
ionr ohs Qoslg no Board Of Excise fyr the Moopo
tan Poic District I60uas g. Acton and three Others, COM
posing le C9nassio ere Of The Metropolitan Police and
John A. KeIredy Superintendent Police The defendants
aeg' aaa hs raP Aad that the plaintiff is engaged 10
selling strong and prgyus liquors end Wines and all 10
titles les than i've ge ons at No GIG Broadway Nov.
York haI has been sed for long time back that tho
Cor 10 srpply demand in bis business that the
10Th o. hy. ls65 ne defendant Teoeived from the
fSTY o ] s State s OF NoS Sc Yo p SsSsf
April TO- 1857 entitled to suppress ntomperance and
tCIeglto the sale Of intoxicating liquors license to sell
strong ald sp,lous liquors and wines 70 be drank in bic
house and the premises No G5 Broadway New York said
license by W terms TO continue in force t 20 days aleF
1866 hal been revoked by order Of any court that the
dmo Of receiving such excise the defendant required by
whob Dc lt that after receiving said license the defendant
Puis-' % .i- st 'oa @ Htuois ana 2oJ V 1 80 o u
hsnl st Gay Of May. 1866 for TIE purpose Of being sold
s5 - iy @ I1' '- sS ts98 agc gallons at q
am ~ 4tg' I'VE i llI-iss i.so .- 49, o..
until o. same should expire according TO It's TERMS OF he le'
Ib5 care then finds that on the 90 day of Nay the de-
PENDANT knowingly sold y various persons whose names are
unknown strong and pirituous liquor wines Gle and beer IN
quantities less than five gallons at time such strong and
spngou1 liquors being sold 70 be drank on the premises Of
defendant ana lat the persons 70 whom such sales were
made bot travellers, ana were known 70 defendant not TO
- ~ i,lers5 q, - sncb ssies rprs1ant 10 tbe
provisions Of April 10 1863 Ire Hoard Of Excise
sse ON o ssoaad that such sales were Of the
provisions Of The Act Of April a. 1906 known as the Excise
To question Submitted in this case the that sub
bTo1Ct b. lie appellants against tie Board Of Excise
understand malea pro- Jorma decision " question then
oay bsnr briefly submitted object being to enable this
Law, which must certainly come 70 hs Court IN ne 70 cone
Cont al tu bf statement Of their conclusions given,
VIZ: u Meore Of tue opni2a taN l57 me- ne 10 o sVn
spri;uo-s liquors Is police ItguA'oH tLu tlat ny
lirs may by statute alter the regulations Tor the sac OF
That the Legislature had the power, Notwithstanding the
hoeR7e 70 prohibit the sale ofg9gor on 5sgds!
Sve o the power Of the L5eisanrs TO take away
Icns should denied by the Court the Get OF 1856 did not
cOmuel him 90 cease selling LquOr on sunCay.
anil 90 recover penalty shat even the provisions the
closing Of tho place business and the arrest Of the parties
void In such where part Of the law H in conflict with
the Constitution oqI that PERI p Separate from tnS IeSu
refar1ee to it, the unconstitutional part only VIII be con
The Board Of Excise, have stated claim TO recover
penalty Of ESQ against the applicant Tor SAFE Of qpoIs sue az
uucxpred unreyoked byeny court leeuaE Granted
60 nun usS c Of F and the Commissioner Of Pc
W te 10 orco against him all the provisions and pen
nes authorized y the act ls66 In case be saa commune
tos,N liquors under that license.
NJ TLa1 coruaed Lis argument at length N support OF
ny ia moi p5rsed TO raise or discuss here the
extent Of legislative power or how fr II may or may not
ri1ht.y extend independent OF constitutional TesctotS
TRU question. far this State is concerned was dis
posed of I'M W. aohaes That the Legislature mas TIE
coIsttuona power TO regulate by stature tle ualc ~
spoas liquors. we'll a. the other inorna. commerce OF
he Sstc will not be denied. But what We DO claim is
fbat while Cseasby attempting 20 regulate me Legsa,
tuie cannot pass Gs5onu G .-c, NJ rroIsrr r-bts ~
the iaou enCO8ch upon his cOnsltuonay guar esu
liberties This latter Is believed tbs act oil 800 d0es IN
r6a 10 act OF April 1866 does express aEnu ard
destroy the license granted under TIC Get OF 80 YI no 3s
derid IL prohibits ana makes criminal ouese uhato
by fus pelsly and Imprisonment me domss me 1eS
which thaticease expressly permits 9Ll a.'-C. ,r,,oSt
vokss and anIus the license by Legislative st.f Euo'
nnv charge trial adjudication Of any oomNeient ouuaL
aud without tie holder Of the license hey1g on! nOee o. 81
portuaity be heard IN his deiense ana Wlnout any
~ nv not Of forfeiture lis part Nov, II those NC hsss ue
corfr1e between the STATE and the citizen or II tl! DC ran
ci poly 40 which the LcIleF Las Ness. la,' 80
will not b. pretended that the Legislature ean thus destroy
tbem n IS only y pr0 Of lag that citizen can De
~, J~isI,fare accommodating the deprivation is not due
oroc.ss OF law vel settled to adult Of arslaent
s, also only by due process OF law thtt plIson
o.1 IA aed gaity and punished for ofcnse And an
oct OF the Legislature pr0nouucng S OF aItHOilAIs "L
- H. e1ine the guilt or innocence Of party without
provisions she statute under consideration 40 "O'A '"s
"gs o t,s earliest tines the elementary writers and
40 courts have yaei, under Tie seei o. term oi 's
two kiuds o! ngIoements or promises -, 49, ,, .,,rae1
no no consideration exacting no eondlons sehooI WIZ
no mauy Poet An sGt Of simple grace ana V J n ar
ests hatcvcr Resting uDOn no oohgaiion pa
from lem mere v or favor OF the gran'0f % s sA4s va!
,ySthir,yy o. revoke theD az ylsasure -, -,
Tbere are other relations between parties aso termed
l,ess,- of entire different character AgFeemeht ~
t,no subiec matter auj persons and granting Va lsoe
rights interests and iraeAlseS sun 1000 he reyoSed or