New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-07-21
JNTERSTATE LIQUOR TRAFFIC.

The endcayOr TO suppress the trauIC III iil""'
mas been greatly embarrassed by the decision
IF the United States Supreme Court IN the
Original Package" cases. On the ground thai
the power of the State, under which ProhlDl-
ton was attempted, could not include power 10
interfere with interstate commerce, which the
Congress of the United States alone can reg
uate the State authorities arc stopped from
Selling packages transported across DOuhdar3
line from one State into another. Judge Phil-
Inns has granted an Injunction at Topeka, Kan,
restraining prosecution of Original Package
agents by local officials, and following this
suits have been begun at topeka against locaI
officials and n newspaper editor VINO are
charged with conspiracy to prevent agents from
carving on their business.
II is in this state of facts that Congress Is
asked to remedy the difficulty by an enact
ment The senate has passed one hlll' ana
substitute being under consideration IN Jhe
House the whole subject was discussed with
great carncStneSS. Mr.. Henderson, OF Iowa.
has held that no other decision ever rendered
by the supreme Court had SO excited the coun-
try as the original package decision ana
" Lille willing 10 recognize 1t as the law ne APP
pealed to Congress 10 apply the only remedy
Mr. Morse of Massachusetts, held that "eter-
nity alone would show the mischief that this
decision had already wrought and MIR. Reed
of Iowa. whose decision as a Judge was over
ruled by the supreme Court, argued that Con-
gres> has power 10 regulate commerce between
states. and therefore to give relief to the people
" from the wrong and evil growing out OF the
decision Of the supreme Court" On the other
hand it was argued by some that the pending
measure, would trench upon the sovereign
power Of a state. and make The state mendl-
can't asking for the privilege Of exercising the
police power which it had never delegated T.
Congress and which was inherent
It seems to be generally inferred that the
power of Congress to "rcgulate' includes the
power 10 suppress a traffic between states
But that is not quite SO clear as 1t might be-
Let it be- remembered that this power Is not
limited by the Constitution. If it is power 70
suppress a, 10 one article or product it exists
as 10 any or all others. VIII it be conceded
that Congress has the power absolutely to pro-
hitjt tn taking of any or all products from on"
state into any other state? II il lie argued
that this power can properly be exercised only
with respect 10 articles the trailc IN which the
laWmakIng body regards injurious, the OBJ
yious answer * that the United states Coy
eminent has for nearly thirty years obtained a
large revenue from the trait" in liquors, ana
can hardly be SAID to hold this traffic which
ought to be stopped by H. laws. Or, If II be
said that Congress simply turns over 70 state
the power 10 determine what products from
other states shall be brought within lis limits.
Vet Congress, cannot delegate power 10 sup
press a traffic if it does not possess that power
itself.
These considerations only serve 10 call at
-cntion o. the many and Scriou, difficulties
which are involved by any effort to suppress
traffic between the States by legislation. 1t IS
not 10 bee doubted that the people can in due
time remodel their government To- suit their
sense of right. But amendment OF the Con
.uution may yet be found the only practicable
mode OF reaching 4 bushes, which one OF the
state, wishc, to stop, but the other adjoining
state, permit After not few unsuccessful
.lIort> IL may yet prove that only by amend
mcnt of the Constitution can trail!c bo Ell
lcctiyclv arrested, at the desire of single
state. either by laws Of that state or by laws
of the United states.