The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1888-03-09

| An Indianapolis special to the New York
! Times outlines a new scheme to pnt an end
to the sale Of intoxicating liquors, and the
special says that it is favored by Prohibi-
| tionists. 1t does away with local option
high license and temperance societies. 1t is
based wholly upon decisions of the Federal
! Supreme Court
In the case of Stone against the State of
Mississippi, in which the right of a State to
repeal a lottery charter was involved, the
repeal being resisted on the ground that the
lottery company, private corporation, had
obtained a vested right, the court said:
mo Legislature can bargain away the pub
lie health or the public morals The people
themselves cannot do it, much less their
! servants. Government is organized for
their preservation and cannot divest itself
of the power to provide for them
Ir the Kansas liquor cases. in which the
constitutionaity of legislation by the State
prohibiting the manufacture and sale of
Intoxicating liquors was involved, the Fed
eral Supreme Court held that such legisla-
ton was constitutional. Mr.. Justice Har-
Ian wrote the opinion. and in the course of
it he said: I'VE cannot shut out of view
the fact, within the knowledge of ALL that
the public health, the public morals, and
the public safety may be endangered by
the general use of intoxicating drinks, nor
the fact, established by statistics accessible
to every one, that the idleness, disorder,
pauperism and crime existing in the coun.
try are, in some degree at least, traceable
to this evil"
On these two decisions the Prohibitionists
rest their new prohibition scheme. Accord
ing to the Mississippi decision, they declare,
no State has right to grant licenses to sell
Intoxicating liquors because the public
health and public morals are said,
by Mr. Justice Harlan, to be
injured by their general use. OF course,
without any license law, anybody would
have the right to manufacture and sell in
toxicating liquors, and the prohibition cause
would not be benefited if every State law
authorizing such licenses were declared I'M
constitutional
But the Prohibitionists propose to make
both decisions effective. Having got rid
of the licenses they believe that, rather
than have absolutely free whisky, public
the enactment of prohibItorv laws, and
such laws the Supreme Court has declared
to be constitutional
This is the new prohibition scheme. 1t
may not strike everybody as likely to be a
successful one. In fact, it is by no means
certain that the Supreme Court would de-
clare that State Legislature has a right to
authorize licenses for the sale of intoxicat-
ing liquors to be issued There is quite a
difference between the effect of a lottery
and the effect of intoxicating liquors upon
public health and public morals.
and this difference might be deemed suffi
cient by the Supreme Court to Justify a
decision somewhat different from that in
the Mississippi case, if the question of the
right of State to authorize licenses to
sell Intoxicating liquors were presented for
its consideration. However, it can be said
for this new prohibition scheme that it is
quite novel Whether or not it Will be sue
cessful, should it be tried, is another
matter.