The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-01-29
PAYING FOR pnoHIB1TIoN,

United States District Court Of Kansas, that
owners of breweries and distilleries in orsr
alton before the prohibitory laws were passed
shall be entitled to recover from the State for
the ra1ue of property condemned or rendered
Comparatively valueless, is not, we think,
conclusive, and it may be that the United
The question is Of magnitude, and affects SO
many people-in fact all who pay taxes
that it will doubtless receive thorough con-
sideration. 1t is conceded, we believe, that
saloon-keepers can not recover from the
State, for the reason that their business has
been conducted only by sufferance, and the
term of license has always been limited, in
Indiana to one year and in Kansas probably
to the same period This implivA that at the
end of that time the privilege may be with
drawn and refused renewal. Those engaged
in the liquor traffic enter upon it with this
understanding, and recognize the provision
by annually attending to the securing of
new license, new lease of life. Those who
are inclined to the opinion that brewers and
distillers cannot be classed in this category,
but must be compensated in case legislation
interferes with their business, are so per-
suaded because the business of brewing and
of distilling islegitimate. not subject to short
term license. but recognized everywhere as on
the same footing with other industries, such
as milling or manufacture in any of its
branches. This distinction is a good one, so
far as it goes; but it does not cover the merits
of the case. When it is conceded that brew
ing and distilling are legitimate, or were legit-
innate prior to the enactment of prohibitory
laws, the concession is no WIDER and does not
embrace the claim that these enterprises en-
joy exemptions from the laws that bear
equally upon all legitimate branches of trade
and industry. The people, representing the
State, ever reserve the right to regulate any
and all lines of business that the good of
society demands. With this in view are
UUdTQS VI ucdltu W tuC cuO tudt til0
physical welfare of the public may be con-
served. And in this right city councils and town
trustees pass upon questions affecting the
health and morals of the communities they
are chosen to represent 1t is within the
province Of these officials to pass upon and
condemn any slaughter-house, paper mill or
other establishment tending to interfere with
the comfort or injure the health of the
people. They are also vested with the
power to interdict anything that may injuri-
ously affect the morals of the people,
or any portion of them. In other
words, organized society reserves the
right to defend itself against what
ever it may pronounce prejudicial to
it, and through the police power has regulated
the manufacture and sale of intoxicants.
This right has been recognized from time inn
memorial, and no man now in this business
but entered upon it under such provisions.
1t has been recognized that there was no GER
tainty of tenure of right to manufacture and
sell intoxicants. 1t has been held that the
police power of the State goes so far as to pro
hibit the manufacture of and traffic in intoxi-
eating liquors From this it follows that
when society concludes that the traffic is
harmful, physically morally or financially, it
has only to assert this reserved and conceded
right to put an end to it, and without preju-
dice or mourning liability, any more than it
would in suppressing anything else after pass
ing upon it as nuisance. 1t is presumable
that the brewers and distillers Of Kansas knew
about these principles of law at the time they
set up in business, and did so knowing
how uncertain the enterprise was. The time
has come, in that State, when the people have
felt warranted in exercising their police rights
to nterdict the manufacture and sale of in
toxicating liquors as beverage. There is
nothing for the brewers and saloon men but
to accept the situation and to make the best
the traffic must be used in some other bust
ness or stand idle, just as the owners elect. 1t
is pretty safe to say that they will never re-
cover dollar from the State. This argument
has nothing to do with the ACCESSIBILITY of
passing prohibitory laws, nor with the proba-
bility or possibility of their proper enforce
ment. It is quite apparent, though, that the
law is measurably accomplishing its purpose,
or such desperate fight would not be made
against it.
WHEN Mr.. Hatch's bill consolidating the
Bureau of Agriculture the labor, census
and scientific bureaus, and the Signal Serv-
;ao and saxroral othor hoe Of ctoua1.n.a