The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1890-04-29
IN THE SUPREME COURT.
Liquor May be Imported Into Iowa Under
the Interstate Act.

WASHINGTON, April 2s.-In he supreme
court to-day the chief justice in de-
liverinR the opinion of the court,
says In part: The power vested
I'm congress to regulate commerce
among the several states is the power 70
prescribe rule by which that commerce
is to be governed. and Is a power COM
plete in itself, acknowledging no limita-
tions other than those prescribed In the
constitution. That ardent spirits are sub
jects OF Interstate commerce cam
not be denied whenever the
law OF q state amounts essentially
10 the regulation OF commerce as when II
inherits directly or indirectly the receipt
of an imported commodity, or its dis
position before IL has ceased to become
an article Of trade between one state and
another, II comes in conflict with the
power which in this particular has been
vested exclusively in the general govern
ment and Is therefore void.
To concetle to a state the power To ex-
clude. directly or indirectly, articles SO
situated, without congressional permis-
sion Is to concede to the majority of the
power TO regulate the commercial inter
course between states by de-
ternining what shall be its SUBJ
jects when that power was
distinctly granted to be exercised by the
people OF the United States represented in
latter. was considered essential TO that
more perfect union which the constitution
was adopted To create.
Justice Gray delivered a dissenting
opinion in behalf Of himself and Justices
Harlan and Brewer. II says, i'm part !:
The power of regulating or prohibiting
the manufacture and sale of intoxicating
liquors appropriately belongs as branch
of the police power, to the Legislatures Of
the several states, statutes in ques-
ton were enacted by the state
| of Iowa In the exercise of its undoubted
power to protect the inhabitants against
the evils, physical, moral and social
attending the free use Of intoxicating
liquors. They are not aimed at inter
| state commerce, but operate only on in
toxicating liquors within the territorial
limits of the state. IL the statutes of the
state in restricting or prohibiting the sale
| OF intoxicating liquors within its territory
are to be held i'm operation and void as
applied TO liquor sent or brought from
| another state and sold by the inn
porter in what are called "original
packages" the consequence must he that
an inhabtant of any state may under pro-
test of Interstate commerce carry or send
| into and sell in any or all of the other
states of the union intoxicating liquors
OF whatever description, despite any
legislation of those states on the subject
and although his own state should he the
only one which had not enacted similar
laws, we would require affirmative and
explicit legislation on the part of con-
gress TO convince us that IL contemplated
or intended such result. The court by
the same vote reversed the decision of the
supreme court OF Michigan in the case oi
Henry Lying, agent for n Wisconsin
brewery who was fined for selling liquol
without a license. Lying attacked th,
that il would compel agents of outsitl,
brewers 10 pay 500 a year license, while
brewers within the state could under ths
manufacturers license sell at wholcsal,
after paying only S65 annual license.