The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1877-02-15
Local option Constitutional.

Those opposed to "local option
urge, with great confidence and posi-
tiveness. that such law is unconstitu-
tional and a violation of their rights.
The following opinions will put, be-
yond question, the constitutionality of
the law of prohibition:
See 3 Towards Reports of cases
argued and sdjudged in Supreme Court
of the United States, PIP. 504-633.
Chief Justice fancy said: ''If any
State deems the retail and internal
traffic in ardent spirits injurious to its
citizens, and calculated to produce
idleness, vice, or debauchery, l see
nothing IN the Constitution of the Uni
ted States to prevent it from regula-
ting or restraining the traffic, or from
prohibiting 1t altogether, if 1t thinks
proper."-5 Hordrd, 577.
Hon. Justice Mclean said: "a Ii
cense to sell is a mater of police and
State. Us Ibid, $50 If the foreign
article be injurious to the health and
! morals of the community, Statesmsy
prohibit the sale of It."-L6id., sos.
Again he says: No one eau claim
license to retail spirits as matter Of
right. ibid, $50.
Hon. Justice Calron said: elf the
State has the power of restraint by
license to any extent, she may go to
the length of prohibiting sales alto
gether. IS Ibid, Gil.
| Hon. Justice Grier said: 'It is not
necessary to array the appalling stats
tics Of misery, pauperism, and crime,
which have their origin III the use and
abuse of ardent spirits. The police
power, which is exclusively In the
D, ate, is competent to the correction
Of these great evils, and all measures
o. restraint or prohibition necessary to
effect that purpose are within the scope
of that authority, and if u loss of reve
nue. should accrue to the United States
from diminished consumption of ar
dent spirits. she will be gamer
thousand foil in the health, wealth,
and happiness of the people. Ibid
532.
The language OF the Decalogue is not
more direct and positive than the
above. If the traffic in ardent spirits
is calculated to pro luce idleness,
vice and debauch,rg," the S ate may
prohibit 1t altogether. III the foreign
article be injurious to the health or
morals of the community, the State
may prohibit the sale flt." Now for a
few plain questions: Are not saloons
and whisky calculated to produce idle
ness, vice or debauchery9 Are they
schools and stimulants to industry 2
Are they promoters of virtue and So
briety2 My own observation and ex-
perience is that saloons and whisky
are not calculated to produce" but
do in fact produce idleness, vice and
debauchery. Then they are in the pre-
else category stated by the Supreme
Court of the United States, and may
be and ought to be prohibited.
To do so will interfere with the
rights Of no man. Man is born into
society and made subject to its re-
stralnts irrespective of his will. So
ciety and government are institutions
essential to his happiness, and he has
no right to destroy or njure them.
Man has power to do evil, but no right
he has power to steal and murder, but
no right; he has power, under exist
ing laws, to sell intoxicating drinks
thereby debasing the physical man
and degrading his moral and intellec-
tual faculties, but no right.
HARD BRICK.