The Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1855-1875, 1873-07-19

The consitu) on assigned thS powr
Of deci1 ne lues1ions Liz thsSs
Can it be legally and constitution
a1y affirmed that the courts know
more Of the effects Of the liquoe
traflc, whether good or evil. than
the Legislaturea Two departments
u De State Government have con-
CURED in the constituiionality Of the
present nqu6e kWt@1 = e kt6re
md Exsou1sse. Skill We assume
the power Of declaring the enact
mdnt voidis Certainly not unless
it WAS clsarly an Infringement Of
the constitution. IF there II, . doubt
upon the subject, that doubt should
Be thrown IN support Of the stat
uta. We can hardly conceive for,
What purpose government, wes in
stituted Il not TO provide the means
Of suppressing crime, and not only
to suppresscrim but. Unnecessary,
for the public good to- provide the
means to suppress even the instxu-
ments and incentives 70 crime. It
has been properly said BY the Su.
prene Court Of Illinois that Z gov
eminent which did not possess the
power 70 protect itself ag&insk such.
evils - doy from tia liquor trafis.
would be scarcely worth preserving.
[ Jones v. the People, Il III. R
106. II is certainly true that the
liquor DEALER does not force men to
drink; but the law presumesr that
he furnishes the means and spreads
the allurements which lead men to-
ruin, hence they come within the
proper province Of Legislative cog
nizsnce, and they legitimstely ex-
ercise the power to throw restraint
on the traffic, Ra .s4s
A man may use and enjoy his
rights to property, but not IN such
. way that it shall become . nui-
-sance 10 the public. He may own
and use gun, but not in the pub
lie streets, 90 - to endanger fhe
life Of the citizen; he may own and
sen books, but not such as are o.
scene and tend to corrupt the NOR
als Of youth. He may own and use
billiard table but not for. gaming
purposes. In all such cases it i
4ul1y competent for the Legislature
70 Intervene and impose the proper
restraints in the use Of individual
apropsrty. II the law is harsh or OPP
prsssive in any Of it's features, It
,must be left to public sentiment TO
correct the wrong by its repeal. So
long o. it is left on the statute book
We can do no less than enforce it's
) provisions. mr &C. .s8e Ell
As to the second question, The
law provides that it ahall be 'sun-
lawful to sell or give intoxicating
liquor to . minor" The terms Of
the act are plain, and without aan-
biguity, md Of course interpreta-
ton is useless It is true that If
the party sells or gives liquor to a
minor, believing in good faith that
the minor u over twenty one years
q age, the party ID not guilty-the
animus to constitute him guilty Of
. violation of the law is wanting-
90 If It 10 sold or given in case Of
sickness, but the case at bar is with
out any such pretense It was
sold in uthis case TO the minor,
sthe1gh drank by other persons Of
It Is said, however, that the de-
1endent il not guilty, because Coval
himself did not drink, and that the
law only intended toProvide against
The selling or giving liquor to q
minor to be drank by him. The
law makes no such quail 6cation, snd
we are not bound to hunt up some
motive to excuse the party over The
explicit terms of the act. Without
doubt one of the principle motives
Of the enactment is to prohibit the
sale to the minor for the purpose
Of being drank by him. It is afact
well known TO every observer that
habits of intemperance in the use
Of intoxicating beverages are usu.
ally contracted in youth. Persons
Of mature years, whose habits in
life are formed, are not In 30 much
danger, and the present crop Of
drunkards infesting the criminal
) courts at this day are those who
generally began drinking in early
6fe. Nor is it out Of the way e
nay that the saloon keepers who, 70,
( the sake of ten cents, will take Eis
IneiRhbor's child and give or sci
him liquor, thereby incnrring
habit which must result in the NOR
Il, mental and physical ruin Of thu
man, deserves but little leniency il
J . court of iustioe. Here It il trua
. the boy does not drink, but buy
!, for the use of others older thar
himself Familiarity with the evi
soon begets q habit. The example
of the old has its influence will
youth. Il the court ct liberty Il
say that The Legislature did not in
tend to provide against just such
easel Did they not design to pre-
vent the traffic in liquors altogethe
by the young! @ lrg
"a The court finds the defender
guilty, and assesses his fine in tn
sum of ten dollars, and, that b
pays the costs Of prosecution.
Touching the sneering allusion
Of the opposition press to Mr.. Col
fax as s'poor," the South Bend Tri
bune says:
"Week after week the oppositio,
press publish and repnbiish tn
ialsehood manufactured by then
L Z u Z