Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1886-06-24
PROHIBITION IN ATLANTA.
The Brewery and the KimbaIl Hous'
BarrOOm to Make Fight.

BarrOOm to Make a Fight.
From the Atlanta (Ga.) Constitution.
The Atlanta brewery and the Kimball
House bar will continue business after
July 1. The owners of the brewery have
employed Messrs. Hoke Smith and W. T.
Newman as counsel, and it is by their adj
vice that the business will be continued.
There will be no attempt to open bars for
the sale of beer, nor will any attempt
-be made in any way to alter
the plans heretofore pursued by the
brewery. Beer will continue to
be manufactured, and it will be delivered
by delivery wagons TO anybody in the city
who may desire to buy it. In other words
the brewery will continue its business
just as fthe question of prohibition had
never been heard OF in Atlanta or any
where else.
1t is hoped by Messrs. Smith & Newman
that the city and county authorities will
not interfere with the brewery's business,
but if they should such interference will
be resented in the courts.
The fourteenth amendment to the con-
stituuOn of the United States declares
that no citizen of any State shall be de-
prived of his life, liberty or property with
out due process OF law. The brewery has
property valued at S150,000. For any
ObuCI pun pOoc Alidl VI
beer, that property at the highest esti-
mate, would not be worth more than
$4,000. If prohibition in Atlanta COM
pels the brewery to cease to manufacture
and sell beer, it will suffer a dead
loss of at least $l35, 000 In other
words, if prohibition closes the
brewery's business 1t will in effect confis-
cate property to the value of $135,O0O.
Such a result will be plain violation OF
~ l. 4 h.
tuition. The local option law, under
which Fulton county has voted to pro-
hibit the manufacture and sale of liquor,
does not provide compensation for losses,
such as the brewery would sustain should
1t be compelled to cease to use its plant.
Compelling it to do 80, therefore, would
be depriving its owners OF their property
without due process of law.
question exactly similar has been
decided by Judge Brewer, of the United
States Circuit Court for Kansas. The de-
cIsiOn does not deny the right of state
to prohibit the manufacture and sale OF
hquor--beer in this instance-butith holds
that where such prohibition entails a loss
upon the plant or property Of the manu-
facturer without providing compensation,
il is a violation of the fourteenth amend
ment, and, therefore, unconstitutional.
Mr.. Smith read decision OF the United
States Supreme Court in which the infer
ence was that the court would sustain
Judge Brewers decision. Justice Miller,
in the decision, minated that he would
be in favor of sustaining the decision;
Justice Bradley virtually declared that
he would do SO whenever he should have
TO pass upon the question, and Justice
Field unquaiifiedly declared that lit was
a wicked law which would so deprive the
citizen of his property" and that he
would sustain the decision.
AS to the kimbail House bar, Messrs.
Smith and Newman have not been spe-
cially retained as the counsel of its own
ers. The lessees OF the kimball House,
however, are Mr.. Smiths clients, and he
has advised them that they have the right
to sell domestic wines. Consequently, IL
has been decided thai the Kimball House
bar will not be closed on July 1, but that
it will be used for the sale Of domestic
wines.
The reporter inquired OF Mr.. Smith the
meaning of the term domestic Wines"
THAT is a question:" MIR. Smith re-
piled, ''and an interesting one. II 10
means wines manufactured in the United
States, then the KimbaH House bar, or
any other bar, NAV sell California wines.
North Carolina wines, or any other wines
manufactured in this country. II IL
means wines manufactured in Georgia,
then the local option law is clearly UNI
constitutional, and will certainly be 50
declared by the United states courts"
"Wby, under the latter meaning, will
the local option law be- declared uncon-
stitutional!
because, If by domestic wines is
meant wines manufactured in Georgia,
the local option law permits a discrini-
nation In commerce against the citizens
OF other states. Ia other words, under
that meaning the local option law Is a
violation OF that section OF the constitu-
ton OF the United States, which declases
that no State shall make law regulating
Interstate commerce. Should "A case De
made against the owners Of the Kimball
House bar for selling wines other than
those manufactured In Georgia and should
punish them for doing ~, and the state
courts should declare she punishment
just, that would be a declaration that
domestic winesl means wines manufac-
tured Ia Georgia. II would then be m
easy matter W have the local option law
declared unconstitutional"
Inquiries made elsewhere developed
that several Of the leading liquor dealers
are considering she adrisabllliY a con-
yertiDR their baFroome into wine rooms.
Others viii await me issue ~ the ven
ture 70 be- made ~ the kinlbah House
bar.
"a wac learned that the brewery viii not
oonilnue lis business without meeilnn
VIA orplsHloH from ihe clfg sad egunfI
authorities. InI "a la nInD oHIIain fnIi IIN
l.unI. ~ I.a TIaII..I IInu.H Ar .III