The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1890-07-25
THE NEW PHASE OF STATE RIGHTS.

The controversy over the Original Pack
age Bill reVives the old quarrel over State
rights in curious place and IN curious
shape In the antebelum days it was the
South which champoned State sovereignty;
it did so because slavery existed by virtue
of State laws. and found no recognition in
the Federal Constitution. Slave-owners had
ever before them the danger that the North
would outnumber them, would control Con-
gress and assail the peculiar Institution.
Hence they were sticklerS for State rights,
and fought fiercely against what they called
usurpation by the Federal authorities.
The conflict of jurisdiction now grows out
of the attempt of certain Central States to
stamp out the liquor traffic. Kansas and
Iowa visit liquor-seling with as severe
penalties as crime. Other States, like Cali
fornia, insist on the right of shipping their
products where they please in the territory
sheltered by the national flag. and United
States courts sustain their claim to be al
lowed to sell liquor in the original package
in spite of State prohibition. On this the
prohIbitonists take an appeal from the
United States courts to Congress, and n
bill is introduced to reverse the Supreme
Court in the orignal-package case. Iowa
and Kansas stand upon the doctrine that
the States are sovereign, and that the police
power which belongs to all OF them includes
the power to regulate the sale of liquors.
Thus, odd to state, the sons Of the Union
veterans have drifted upon the very ground
which was occupied by the Southern Seces-
Sonists thirty years ago.
The trouble which has grown out of the
original package case proceeds from the
difficulty of defining and limiting the "po-
lice power" The minority of the Supreme
Court in rendering their decision in the
Iowa case declared that "the police power
extends to the control and regulation of
things which, when used in proper and
lawful manner, are subjects of property
and commerce, and yet may be used so as
to be injurious or dangerous to the public
safety, the public health or the public NOR
ais" This definition is very VAGUE in its
scope. Almost everything is susceptible of
being used in such way as to seem to
threaten the public health, the public
safety or the public morals. The range of
topics as 10 which, under this ruling, the
jurisdiction of the State is exclusive, and
Federal interference is impertinent, is so
wide that it is practically without limit.
We are gradually approaching point at
which some authoritative ILLUMINATION of
the mutual powers of the Federal and State
Governments viii become absolutely neces-
sary. If the majority of the Supreme Court
which decided the Iowa case have laid down
the law for the future the States have lost
the police power and it has passed into the
hands of the Federal authorities. If. on the
other hand, Justice Gray and the other dis
senting Judges have laid down the law cor.
rectly, the Federal Government Will gTadu-
ally become 4 mere instrument employed by
the States for the transaction of certain
business and decentralization viii become
the order of the day. 1t was undoubtedly
the purpose of the fathers to hedge the Ma
tional Government round with restrictions
and limitations so as to reserve to the States
all the sovereignty consistent with the
transfer of the control of foreign affairs
and foreign commerce to the federation.
But the lessons OF the war showed that a
rigid adherence to this purpose was incom-
patible with healthy national life. 1t be-
came necessary quite often during the war
for Mr. Lincoln to stretch the military
power so as to override the police power of
the States. and Jefferson Davis protests
against these "usurpations" were received
with derision, while the people showed by
their quiet acquiescence that in the event Of
future disturbance they would endure even
larger entertainments upon State jurisdic-
ton by the central authority.