The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1867-01-12
HE COURT S .
COMMON plsAs-SeEeRAl TERM.

Decision In she Case OF the Excise Law-Tbe
Injunctions vncased--A Diswracefal Scene
The Decision Of the Court Of Appeals Called
"Bogus,' and the Remark Appinuded by
the Liquor Dealers-Rebuke Of the Court
Opinions OF the Judges, &C.. &c.
Before Judges Daily, Brady and Cardozo.
Yesterday morning there was grand rally OF the
liquor dealers this court in anticipation Of the decision
Of the Of Holt The Excise Board, which 1t
understood would be given at that time. The Court
that the order Of the Special Tenn granting the
njuncton reversed and that the order for them
be vacated would BIO entered
Mr. McKeon who counsel for several hundred liquor
Dealers asked the counsel for the Excise Board the
law to be enforced Immediately or whether notice
would be given
that Immediately after the decision Of tho Court
Of Appeals was announced on the 50 OF jan
usry, an order ..,, was issued by supenn.end.
put in execution upon the 18th. He though that a
good and sucient notice 70 all the parties concerned,
tions binding would be dissolved The 18th was TO-
morrow There were certain provisions Of tho law
do For inatance. the taking down OF the agns. Il
nos iussaed totncyrow % put those provssioas n
10 close on sunday must BE- complied Win undoubedy
An tho provision which required them have licenses
s mot prepared to bat he supposed that the
applied for licenses but from the absence Of OF the
Commissioners they could not DO granted before %
Mr. McKeon wished TO know II the parties we're really
anxious % get license were they 70 be subject to arrest
Mr. Bliss thought that they wsre fair notice had
been given that they might make application and many
had done 80.
a motion was then made that the order should be
withheld for fow days to enso'c the liquor dealers
Judge DsyTbis is the last day Of our term that NO
have any control TO decide tho question.
Counsel for plaintiff thought that the order might b
ana NJ 70, e%n down .n IKE .
or New York had already denounced the decision o. the
Court q Appeals BY majority q over cry thousand
NJ HcKson-I dsnouncs the decision OF the Court Of
App.als - bogus corcern Applause clappng Of
Judge Dsiyt : not tradltonary in this court to bear
the highest tribunal In the State thus spoken OF and re-
SILENT The cour. Of Appeals have settled ali the
questions OF this The tendency Is 70 bring the ad
tOrs hss anyhns Of the kind takes place viii be
speedily checked; and II any demonstrations such
have taken p,,cs are repeated again shall use the full
shall adopt other measures.
Mr. McKeon-rhis is not the place TO snsvcr tho |
court submit to the rcbuke, but those my convic
tons stand upon that. and in the proper time and
place Il win be shown.
Counsel for the liquor dealers shed for week. when
counsel for the Excise Board agreed that the law should
be enforced until next Friday with the exception OF
the provision relating to the traffic on tho Sabbath which
would be enforced next sunday
Tho question arising In regard 70 those cases which |
have not been argued the Court decided, tina, those
and the decsIon shall bind them sso. |
OPINION JUDGE DAILY.
Ge1y1s W. Hat The Commissioners II E1css fc--
All the questions asn9 IN this case were presented and
passed upon In the four decided by the Court OF
Appcals We are asked TO disregard these cases upon
the purpose Of obtaining tho decision which been
rendered.; and that submissions OF controversy |
without action they were not In The mode In which the
This is not matter for this court 70 |
inquire into The remedy, any, Is 70 be |
n
brought. and in the Court or Appcnla II In cgh for
to know that the Court Of Appeals in cases VIII Oh
must esi,naely before IT, has decided all
tho questions that arc presented here and It's interre
taoD Of the COURT as the court Of last resort Is binding
upon all other tribunals In the state We asked
further 70 look into decision OF the Supreme Court OF
tho United States catisfy that the act IN question Is
In violation Of the constitution OF the United States Il
is sufficient for us that the Court Of Appeals nave de-
cided that T. is not and the plaintiffs remedy 10
into this court and ask Us 10 disregard tho highest
Judiciary authority In the siaic but II he thinks that
tho decision OF the court OF Appeals crroneous ne
must so TO the trioanai-the Supreme Court Of The
United States-where the decision Of that can /
alone be reviewed The order appealed from should be
reversed.
1hx Same w. the Scms--we have boon asked 90 dis.
regard the decision Of the Court Of Appeals in
involving questions ulmar 70 those presented for
sideraon In this and other cases, upon the ground that
the Supreme Court Of the United States. TO whose
tnor,y we owe higher allegiance, has effect declared
has determined 10 be othcr~,ao This proposit
not be entertained and We must hold the decision Of he
Court OF Appeals CONCLUSIVE upon " Ill questions
whcn IL relates. Whether the heard and deter
mined by that court we're tod I'D cases moi az sug
gessed BY Judge DAILY Is matter which should have
been addressed 10 the consideration of the tribunal 70
winch those cases originated tho Court OF Appeals
The judges OF tho Court Of Appeals arc equally bound
with US 10 observe all obligation 10 the laws Of The land
declared ny tue Supreme Court Of til, United Sats
and they have considered them and said that the act
In question NOT violation OF any clause provision
Of the const uton OF this tate Of the United states
Tborr ~ M reason therefore, change the opinion en-
teained by the court wien the views OF Tie respond
ents presented In relation 10 the do ision
Of the court Of Appeals and s ct q and the order OF
appeal from should therefore be reversed.
orrSI;T OF JUDGE AfDOzo |
The u NJ Tac dms.-I have examined the cssns VI
the Court Of Appeals together With The opinion q thst
tribunal, written ~ Judge Wright which stre SUP
mtted by the counsel for tie appellants on me
argument Of the appeal herein nnd thai The Court of
Appea has pfvnanpccd statute IN question 70 be
CONSTITUTIONAL That dec ison a The determination OF
the " ast IN tnis state posse sing TIE rRht
to reverse Oral Judgment Is concnsve, and must
be controlling guide In sc.raung the Jaw As this
case Ia no, fairly dIsnguishable In It's facts or In the
gu stion prcseu,a IRON OF those passed upon by
the Court Of Appeals, follows, 10 conformity With that
dortrcn yvhafa OuiuOuq L midi.