Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1884-11-06
Liquor Men Again Deceived.

A majority of the Supreme Court, in
deciding tho Scott law unconstitutional
lodged the main questions again. The
questions argued to the Court were:
1. Has the Stats right, under the
Constitution. to levy assessments or a
tax upon the liquor trafic?
3. Is the Scott law tax. or q license
law. and, if either. does it come under
the inhibition of the Constitution?
The Court did not pass upon either of
these questions, but declared that the
law is unconstitutional, on the ground
that q previous decision rendered the lien
feature unconstitutional.
If the Legislature re-enacts the pond
law without the bond feature. the Ques-
tion as to whether the State has right,
under the Constitution, to levy assess
ments or tax upon the liquor traffic.
and whether such 10 license or tax
law, can be brought before the Supreme
Court again. Anything that the Legis.
lature may do to bring in the license or
tax feature, In some shadowy form or
otherwise, also opens the door fer addi-
tional litigation. 1t will be observed
that majority of the Court, in handing
down the last two decisions, svaded the
main questions in both instances. The
liquor mon are entitled to decision
that will settle this question: Is the
principle Of taxation or assessment un-
constitutional Not whether the lien
feature is, or is not, unconstitutional be-.
cause u feature of that lava lien
clause-lS unconstitutional, OF was de-
clared unconstitutional by former de-
cision, does not kill the spirit of the law
the tax assessment bat indicates that
its collection may be made safe and cer>
tain in some ether form than by a lien
on the property. The liquor men who
believe that the decision of the Supreme
Court, that was handed down on Tues
day, settles the question that the princi-
pie of taxation or assessment is uDcGn-
stitutional are deceived. Whether they
are being deceived for purpose is a
point we leave for their consideration
As matters stand-having carried their
business into politics and litigation-the
men engaged in the liquor traffic are be-
tween tive mi.lstoDes; the attorneys, who
want their money, and politicians, who
want their votes. Attorneys, as class, !
fairly earn their money in these cases. |
Politicians, as class, stand ready to en-
Ter into a conspiracy to juggle with this |
question. That the leaders of the Dem |
Dcratic party are juggling with it, and |
that the liquor men are the victims, is as
certain as that two and two make four. |
The Republican party has taken stand.
Liquor men know where to find it. |
They know that its demands are not un-
in the interests of the tax
payers at large. They know that while
The Republican party desires to enforce
This tax, the voters of that party, as a
,'ass, have not been disposed to push |
The liquor traffic to the wall. or to de-
,eive the men who are engaged in it.
On the other hand, in two conspicuous
the liquor men have Eeen led
% suppose that they were to get deci'
sion in the Supreme Court that would
forever settle the question that taxation
Or assessment under the present consti
tuition is unconstitutional. Instead of
getting thst-at the last moment, when
heir votes are wanted-they get deci>
sion that is not what they wanted, and
that is calculated to deceive not only the
liquor men. but all who are interested
IN the question at bar.-Columbus Dis
patch.