The Iola register., 1886-01-08
ANOTHER DECISION.


Sudge Cros'sr nsnders DECISION In the
AeaSenwortn Liquor Cases'
In the District Court at Leavenworth,
when the Injunction suit brought BY the At.
fornev Ceneral arainst Harmon a Raum tr
r..tr.,, thar, f-or, ..,,;re ,;,ror vo.
called IOr ulai, Juoge Crozief, aItet feaainR
section Is of the State law. which declares
tnat places where liquors are soid are com
mon nuisances rendered. in substance- the
..,,...-- s...-,.
following decision:
the sIlov.nce ~ the temror.rv iniunctiou
- -.S"..Ss
uPOn ."eeo eEounus'
First, That the prohibitory act OF 1881 and
the amendments thereto contain more than
or. .uh,.ct ,vhich 4. not c,a.r,v exnro.sod
a., ~. t;t,a.
In tne ute;
Second, That the thirteenth section above
quoted, is part of q special act; and
Third rho& mi. =. . rroeecutiop ana Tho
80. ~. s"-,'s :. 70 80 =, "'
First, As to the first objection. section 10 of
article of the constitution provides: "No
bill shall contain more than one subiect.
-a,.L .L.n - -, S...s a, a., 80 ;,
The point OF this objection is that section IL
of the amendment to the prohibitory act
rrovidoe for . c;v,, and n criminal proceed.
i-.s. 80 ,."..- - -
ing, "hicn arc Two uis'ihct anu seParate SUI
tects, and that the title OF the act indicates
but one subject The title il: IAN act to
rrohih,t tho manufactures and sale of
intoxicating ,ionor eIcent for mcdicinal
scientific ana mechanical purposes, and
to regulate the manufacture and sale
thereof for such excepted purpose" In
November, 1880. the following amendment
was added to article Is of the constitution: :
Section 10. The manufacture and sale of in
tOxicating liquors shall be forever prohib-
tied in this State except for medicinal, sci
entif1c and mechanical purposes. This
amendment without any clause specially
providing therefor. authorizes the iegis lation
necessary to carry 1t into effect. What that
legislation should be was left TO the wisdom
subject only to the limitations that 1t shall
not violate the constitution of the United
States or other provisions of the Constitu.
thorize a civil or criminal proceeding, or both.
Second, Section II. article 2, of the constitu-
tion reads as follows: "All laws of general
nature shall have q uniform operation
throughout the State, aud in all cases where
general law can be applicable no special
law shall be enacted, 1t is objected that the
prohibition act singles out and makes spe-
DIAL provision with reference TO the nuisances
denounced by il, and is therefore special
legislation within the meaning of this clause
of the Constitution. 1t means what it says
The Legislature may denounce as u crime and
act within constitutional limitations proyid.
ing a separate punishment for it ana a sep.
arate manuer of treating it. and such a pro.
vision will not be special legislation within
the meaning OF the constitution, provided it
apply uniformly to the same act, all over the
State Or in other words, have a uniform
operation throughout the State This law
does provide thai keeping open house for
the provisions of the act shall be deemed
nuisance. and provides the manner of treat
ing it, which provisions apply to the same
facts everywhere in the State. and therefore
stitution above quoted. Hence, the law is
not unconstitutional upOn that ground.
third objection is a much more
serious one, and it would be aEectation in
me to say that a proper construction and ad.
of this statute did not involve
great dify1culty What kind of prOceedjnR or
proceed nes are provided for in this thir.
teenth section? Are they all. If there be
is there but one. and that n criminal pro.
ceedinRY Or. II there be more than one,
js one a criminal proceeding! 1t will be OBJ
served that the original paper in this case is
called a "Detition. aIed ,Ipon the relation of
the Attorney General in the name of the
State. II gives the court to be Uniformed
of what the Attorney General claims to be
yiolat iOns of the act setting out what would
he necessary I'm case he proceeded to only
abste the place as a nuisance. Now, must it
be held that because he calls his paper filed
snatitiOn' that the nYOCen0inQ II civil
ones The act does not in terms give it that
The allegation it contains are
ayerements of acts denounced by the statute
itself as crimes. The rule established for
IS: .sThat not the Language alone of the iegis-
lation shall control. but the essence of the
thing itself shall be looked at to determine
its character" To illustrate: The law of this
State upon tho subject of illegitimate chill
tren charscterizes the proceeding to secure a
support for them as a prosecution" author
ICES It to he conducted in the name
Of the State and by the County At
that the proceeding, nevertheless, is u civil
proceeding, end not criminal one The law
regulating proceedings IN forcible eutry and
ietainer provides for the filing of a com.
NAV he by n jury and the verdict that is to
be rendered is guilty" or mot guilty
peculiarly applicable to Grim
nal proceedings: end yet the same court has
"a d that this is a civil proceeding, because
the object and purpose OF it are civil objects
and purposes Other illustrations might be
given, showing that in the opinion of the
Supreme Court the essence of the thing it.
self must he looked to. TO determine its char
.cter, which must control, even against the
letter of the statute. end so say IN this case
that must control. Nevertheless.
he Legislature may have used term here
.ofore applicable to civil proceed ngs alone.
In other words. the Legislature may adopt
lnS portlOn OF What mas ueIetoiorc pccu uh.
ierstood to be civil proceeding in criminal
natter which possibly they NAV have done
n this case II SO, then the whole section is
20 he administered as so much OF
he criminal law of this State, aud
, proceeding under it would he
criminal proceeding, that is. prOsecu
ion. The constitution provides in the tenth
section OF the bill OF rights. that ''in all pros
,cutions the accused shall be allowed a
speedy public trial by IN impartial jury OF
he county or district in which the Ofiense
has been comm m,tted." In constituting this
section of the bill Of rights, his honor Judge
Brewer. when upon the Supreme Bench in
his State. held that proceed. ng under city
ordinance of this city for maintaining y
Nuisance is q prosecution" because the
let was criminal n it's nature, notwithstand-
ng t5 the constitution ton provides in section l..
.arried on in the name Of the State" Here
vas a case where the prosecution was not i'm
he name of the State but in the name of the