The Eaton Democrat. (Eaton, Ohio) 1875-1903, 1885-09-17

1901 nn
1852 3'S20'o9 81 U 0c
1883 10 0S00 30
1854 S5'""oo11 N N
#, from the local Indebtedness in the year
1885 there be rejected the amounts rendered
was Unconstitutional, and by the Cincinnati
repaving bill the sum will not vary materi-
ally ally, from ssan the mounts oraHion aso wears oy T NJ fig-
ures are taken from the face of the statutes.
They include bonds issued to pay debts, and,
| earlier bonds. Attorney-General Lawrence,
who has been carefully over THIS grouna,
saeIu mH so of Hamilton Ah nhs 9,t the additional local
| debt, or debt exclusive OF reminding, per
| mitted in Governor Fosters last two years,
It must not be forgotten here, too. that this
local Indebtedness is not the result OF party
legislation, and while all good citizens de-
piore the increase of the public debt in any
portion of the State, Senator Sherman and
Judge Foraker must produce the statute and
point out the particu llsfoh act .S creating Gnvsr ,nas
the power, or their mouths are closed
s seaIei A maf thefr a eayndi SaHmp'fft or Attorney nas
General did not see fit to make this fght IN
the General Assembly, they nave no rignt ~
some act he oughtito have voted against: ls
Mr.. Sherman ready to go to Troy and COZ,
plain OF the IaT To, a,lo honse. or t to- come here
to Hamilton on the same errand, OF TO 70 70
St. Clairsyille expTTeessisng w 2 nke b oo sfpp the
water-works at Ravenna, or the Tenuiso1 Ing ~
of the Hamilton County Court House, Pc
cause such Improvement neeessitate an III
crease of local indebtedness?
Fellow citizens: Three candidates for GOV
ernor are presented for your sufrages; Or.
humble servant, Who believes in license, and
Judge Foraker, whose party IS autnoIita.
t Pyobyyb stafed a6 nd Ss nG b. r taki ana this hS' p%osition'
is put into the place of the sandwich man 81
politics, and who is under obligation TO carry
. read over the Rhine in Cincinnati against Pro
|, hibitioi, and another behind TO be read II
Oberlin for Prohibition, u...,s ro,,rt .,
j Ohio for having. pullif1ed the Scott law by {
: BIPARTISAN judicial decision" They prom
] the tax Collected, but got out Of this BY az
. other partisan decision. *** BY their act!
+ the Scott law is a dead letter. and according
no power in the Legislature to either prohibi
0 or tax the sale of liquor"
And his astonishing and shameful remed.
: r ts nn,fy tn sRes the so, eleetion 1po Of Repsu %diiic,S
Judges that will construe the constitution Q
o the State on the side of "temgeGanoe ana m g gSG
d and his name is dear to every lawyer IN IN
State, who, adorn ng the bench OF the 81
RaVe been chosen for the purpose of decidin
k in any particular direction, and VINO, J
elected, would have refused to sit In a cas-
lr | III WHICH ut u cApICSSCN " r
is ion. This great and good mans son now VI
iiss blushingiy appeals for the election of a part
san judiciary and challenges the Preseii
X the highest degree creditable to that dign
fed n impartial body, because it SO scrup.
n of partisanship. What did the Supren
ID Court of Ohio dor How did it treat the SEQ
to law question? That question has been o
4. the question argued was not presented /
,e fae re ef But aee VS. 1Whitbeck, IL o.
1t, 253, it decided that the Scott law was q hcen'
law so far as it provided for q lien on reale
tate, and unconstitutional to that extent, az
refused to decide whether it was unconstit
nj tional in any other respect, because the que
1t, I T6i, dfgi io t Tss case aUe Of the State VS.. Sinks,
he o. S. 345, the question being at iast present,
or by the record, the Court held the Scott Ia
,ct effect, it was a license law, without decidil
because the Law did not req uire III wheth
he any other law could be passed FOR the taa
lct ton of the traffic in Intoxicating liquors; a.
is fourthly, the Court has decided in a cas-
RS which is still pending on q petition for
d- hearing, that the money PAID underline SCI
nd One of the ablest and purest men IN On
OF q member Of the supreme Court, who v
TO since they were rendered, gone to his 10
aocount. / pause from the current.
political debate to indulge for a moment
we the sorrow feel at the loss of one Of !
sss truest friends, and one of the nobl'
nts gentlemen in OhioTJndge Son4 W. Sheye
vas Court of Ohio the Endorsement of every J.,
ISS4 and right-thinking man in the state. II !
the proceeded with dignity and acted with p
vas dence and wise Judgment It has render
yao no BIPARTISAN judicial decision whatever.
vas remains for the new Court. to Pc srea.ea
to speech, to indulge in what he progresses
be the result of their action, VIZ; the G
If struction of the Constitution. of the State
For favor of what he calls Temperance and g
sod order;' whereas if the Democratic party
dg- coed in electing their candidates Tor Juoe
ance with law. and not by any partisan I
whatever. The Constitution of the State
inst Ohio, requiring taxation to be upon Pr1pe
according to its money value, forb1ds, Q
strong Implication, the arbitrary taxation
WV. any of the functions of property. The ia
po 20 tional, and Just as Unconstitutional as
the taxation of the sale Of a farm or g raiire
,sti- The Supreme Court of the United States
ulii- property is a taxation Of the properly 1tS
de- Brown VS.. Maryland, Il wheaton. 4ls; Wei
RITZ VS.. Missouri, 81 United States, 2I5. -,
Itch 1t is familiar law, as every lawyer knt
itIV that under the law of wills the gift of tn.
g of come arising from property is a grit OF
! T re. pp1 F9pSEty se ienssd. clear ear to see ms m naasDf that Il
ion, taxation of the sale of liquor. as J
d TO were an entity or substantial thing a.
ntaI which was not supposed to exist in Ohio
AGO. more than thirty years after the adoptio
the present CONSTITUTION, can not be
attic tanned without an amendment of the.co
the tuition.
con The real question at issue is that Of pl
oh a bition or license. The characterof the 5
law as a license, in morals If not In
would be at once visible If it were prop
a to tax every house of iIl-fame or CANT
house $500 or any other arbitrary sum;
dis that the Scott law as a temperance mea
INN. was Intellectual. was shown by its result
! the did not diminish the amount OF dr1nklI
the State. 1t repealed the Democratic l
no a lation of 1854, and by permitting the sa
LIQUOR to pc drank on the premises, 1t hat
, ont effect, as Allen o. Myers well said in Ic
in 1883, ''of chartering every man who
mar willing to pay $500 for the privilege OF m
less featuring drunkards." The good point o
the Scott law, IL IL mas QUE u. az Is ~
law as a revenue measure-not thatlt prom
Nv of morality, for it does not promote mo-
ever except 'for revenue only" Considerin
Tho real question in Ohio, then, as being bet
, tho prohibition and license whether that lie
over be in the form of a Scott law or permit.
the an amendment to the Constitution, the
ocratic principle is plainly stated in the
for il form OF our party.
when We are opposed to sumptuary leg1sl
f Gin and in favor of licensing the traffic in IL
-er of eating LIQUORS.. We believe in self-co
ok it and that the true remedy against the tel
oners lions of liquor-drinking is to make /
ayes. homes; and that personal liberty shout
epub- be destroyed by law, except where its
uDal Else is ALWAYS wrong, No man Seel