The Emporia weekly news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1881-1889, 1881-06-16
JUDGE MORTON ON THE PRO-
HIBITION LAW.

Judge Morton, of Topeka, in the
Shawnee county district court, on
Wednesday, rendered decisions in four
cases under the "Act to prohibit the
manufacture and sale of intoxicating
liquors, except for medical, scientific
and mechanical purposes" In each
case The defendant filed a motion to
squash the information as not stating
facts sufficient to constitute public Of
Tense, and it was upon questions arising
out of these motions that the opinion OF
the court was given.
In two OF the cases referred to, the de-
PENDANTS, both of whom were druggists,
were charged with selling brandy and al
cohol upon a written prescription of a
practicing physician without having
procured druggists permit therefor
from the probate judge, as is required
by the second section of the prohibition
act; and the court, holding that the Leg
islature has the right to put such reason
able restrictions upon a privilege guar
anteed by the constitution as to prevent
its abuse, and also recognizing the power
of the Legislature 10 confer upon the
probate court any jurisdiction not lncon-
sistent with the exercise of that confer
red upon il by the constitution, over
ruled the motion in each case to quash
the information.
In the other cases the defendants, also
druggists, were charged with selling,
without having taken out the permit
required by the prohibition act, medical
preparations, the base of which was al
cohOl, but which contained large pro-
portion of drugs and medicinal herbs,
in the form of bitters and |
of patent medicine. The court in these |
cases sustained the motion to quash the |
and accompanied its decis- |
ion with the following pertinent obser-
vations:
"The history of the movement which |
resulted in the adoption of the 'Prohibi- |
ton Amendment" and the enactment of |
the law now under consideration, and |
the object TO be thereby secured. are too |
well known TO give rise to any dispute |
Those who voted for the amendment |
were not voting To prevent the use of ar
ticles common To toilet purposes or cult
nary use. 1t was no attack upon bay
rum, camphor or tincture of lemon; it
was intended only to strike at such
liquors and mixtures us were in ordinary
and known use as intoxicating
beverages-Or which, in the failure
TO obtain such beverages, it could
and fairly be believed
would bc used as substitutes. 1t
seems that this intent and object of the
law must be taken into consideration as
M important element in its construction
and that while some particular prepare
ton, or "patent medicine" might posi-
bly,, in il few cases, with a few exception
al constitutions, produce effects similar
10 intoXicatiOn-at an enormous risk OF
health of life perhaps-the real question
and test, to which each "liquor" or "mix-
lure" is TO he submitted, is about this:
rs there reasonable danger that this will
be used as-Or as an equivalent SubSti-
ute for-an intoxicating beverage ~
The law should receive a reasonable
onstructiOn-cqually removed on the
lne hand from Il fanatical coloring, and
IN the other from tendency TO fritter it
away.
These cases will he taken to the SUI
prcme court, and will be heard at an
early day in connection with those from
he Leavenworth district court, in which
Judge Crozier recently gave an opinion.