The post. [volume] (Middleburg, Snyder County, Pa.) 1864-1883, 1874-02-12


The Speaker laid before the Houss
= communication FROM Tho ATTORNEY
General in answer 70 resolution AZ
ing his opinion 10 reference 10 The
constitutionality Of an act TO repeal
the local option law, which was read
as follows:
To The Honorable TIE House of Re.
presentatives Of tie Con, mon :
'ceahh Of fsnnsyipania:
GENTLEMEN have the honor IN
acknowledge the receipt Of the FOL.
lowing resolution, adopted on the
24th inst, by your honorable bodv
Resided, Tbat tho Attorney Gen.
ernl DO requested to inform this
House whether, in his opinion, an
act to repeal the local option law can
be passed without violation OF the
Constitution"
The net therein referred 10 ia on.
titled Act 20 permit the voters OF
this Commonwealth to vote every
three years on the question OF grant
ing license TO sell intoxicating liouors
approved March n, 1872, TO which
supplement was enacted, approved
March G, 1873.
This act has not been passed upop
by the Supreme Court, but the eourt
ON the 18th Of March, 1873. passed
upon an act containing substantially
tho same provisions, entitled An act
to allow the voters of the Twenty
second ward OF the city of Philadel
phia to vote on the question Of grant.
ing license to sell Intoxicating Iio-
nors, approved May 8, 1871. In de
hvering the opinion OF the court, Mr.
Justice Agnew, said: "Whatever
the Legislature thus (having before
referred to the date Of the act) de.
termined to b. is hp, for 80 much
vas then a fixed and absolute re.
solve'--aad that "thus it is perfectly
manifest this law was not made. pro-
nounced or ratified by the people +:
when the law came from tie halls of
Legislation ii camoa perfect law" and
he asks, "Then what did the votes de
eide = Clearly not that the act should
become law or not be, for the law
already existed. Indeed it was not
delegated to the people to decide
anything. They simply declared
their views or wishes, and when they
did so, it was the fiat Of the law, not
their votes which commanded licen
ses to be issued or not to be issued. Z"
The objection to the law was, that
1T was a delegation OF Legislative
power to the people, empowering
the people. or attempting SO to do,
to legislate, enact law. and. there.
fore, unconstitutional. The Supreme
Court held it WAS not, that it was n
perfect law when it left the halls of
Legislation.
lam unable to discover why tho
power That enacted it may not repeal
it without violation of the Constitu
ton. The power Of the Legislature
is supreme over the matter. IL may
at any time withdraw the privileges
it extended to the people. The fact
that the people were permitted to
express their views and wishes, and.
in compliance herewith, licenses
were issued or not issued, gives it no
greater permanency as a law. It
still remains as law, enacted by the
supreme power of the State, and the
power that enacted it can, ut any
time, destroy or repeal it In the
language OF Chief Justice Gibson.
the Constitution allows to the Leg
islature every power which it does
not positively prohibit There is
nothing in tho Constitution prohibi-
tory OF the enactment referred to in
the resolution, and the Legislature
has the undoubted rightto repeal the
law referred to, if such be its pleas
ure.
With high respect, your obedient
servant SAMUEL L. DIMMToK,
Attorney General