Smyrna times., 1890-05-07
Congress Should Intervene.

Inc police power of State to regu.
late or prohibit the sale of those arti.
| cles whose unrestrictive use it considers
deleterlous, and the right of the Fed
eral Government to regulate inter
state commerce, are powers covering
TO large extent the same objects, and
their application has been always a
subject of dispute. The decisions bear
Ing on this conflict of powers are mapy
IN number and difficult to reconcile.
Now the pendulum has swung to the
extreme State rights view, and again
the court has upheld the national ex-
elusive control, regardless of the re-
sultlng Inconvenience and mischief. No
decision can be found. however. so rad
ically opposed to the accepted idea of
the right OF State to regulate its own
domestic affairs as the opinion render
ed by Democratic Chief Justice Fuller
on Monday, and cOncurred in bv Dem
ocratic Justices Field and Lamar. and
opposed by three Republican Justices
-Gray, Harlan and Brewer.
nat a state may not prohibit the
importation OF liquor seems sufficient
~ logical deduction from the exclusive
power OF Cangress to regulate inter
state commerce. That a state NAV
not put any tax or restriction on the
sale of imported liquors not imposed
on those of Domestic manufacture. is
an obvious cOrOllary from the general
inhibition ofinterference by the States
with interstate commerce. When the
supreme Court goes further aud saws
-as 1t does in the original package de-
clslon-that prohibition or restriction
as to the sale of an article in State.
while enforceable against all other cit
lzens OF State, may not be enforced
against an importer so long as Re lin
It's his sales to the original packages.
1t makes prohibitOry amendments nu.
gatory, and high license laws of little
effect.
Although in the Michigan case de-
clded there is an allegation that the
importer, who was also a brewer, was
Disseminated against bv the license
laws of Michigan, the decision does
not rest on this fact Of discrimination.
The court holds that ali importer can
not be made to ~ license in order
TO sell his original package of liquor,
although the domestic wholesaler sell
ling the same amounts would have to
pay for the privilege. To arrive at
this decision the Supreme Court is
obliged to OVerrule its decision of forty
years ago upholding the New Hamp-
shire license law. That State prOhibi-
ted the sale Of liquor in quantities less
than twenty eight gallons without a
license from the State. This law the
Supreme Court held was binding on
importers as we'll as others, and pre-
cluded them from selling in New
Hampshire even in original packages,
except in compliance with the State
law. This was a righteous and com.
mon sense decision aud Its annulment
Is grave misfortune.
The only relief for these untoward
conditions lies with Congress. That
body has authority to enact, under its
power to regulate commerce, that i'm
porters of intOxicants into anv State
shall have power to sell the same
whether in original packages or other.
wise, only in compliance with the pro-
hlbitions placed upon the sale of liu-
uors by the laws of the State upon its
owntcitizens. Having the power it is
the duty of Congress to take the mat
ter up at once, before this original
package decision OF the Federal Su-
preme Court shall have time to work
to the full of it hurtful consequences.