The Iola register. [volume] (Iola, Allen County, Kansas) 1875-1902, 1890-06-20
oalcIsAl eAckAdk okclslos.
Judge Caldwell Orders tie nlscharre of
Liquor Package Vendors Convicted In

LEAvESwoRrH, Kan, June 16.-JudQe
Caldwell, in the United States Circuit
Court, Saturday afternoon rendered his
decision in the noted habeas corpus
original package" cases from Shawnee
County.
Nine OF the cases decided were from
Topeka, the other being from Salina,
and grew out of the recent decision by
the United States Supreme Court in the
matter of the sale of intoxicants in the
original packages in which they are
shipped.
Judge Caldwell's decision is in line
with the Supreme Court decision, and
the petitioners for a habeas corpus writ
were ordered discharged from custody.
Their names are as follows: w. w.
Beine, Carl Jockheck, Christian Schmidt,
j. K. Deisher. j. B. linn, w. ii. Copp,
L. Yout, Jacob III. -Sicher, Bernard
Touchman. c. A. Rahre, George Bell
Fhe following is the full text of Judge
Caldwelrs decision:
Eleven different persons have separately
petitioned this court for writs of habeas
corpus to relieve them ON alleged impris-
onment in violation of the Constitution of
the United States. The cases were heard to-
gether, and while there is some difference
the minor details the material and con-
trolling facts are the same I'm airthe cases.
Prosecutions were instituted against the
petitioners, charging them with selling
liquor in violation of the laws of this State.
They were arrested and, failing to give bail,
were committed and .hereupon fileI their
petitions in this court, alleging that they
WEI iKtaKN
tntion of the United States in virtue
OF criminal Prosecution scommeuced
against them in the State courts of
Kansas for selling liquor in that
State in alleged violation Of Reconstruction
and laws; that the liquor, for the selling of
which they were prosecuted and impris-
[ oned, was shipped by its owners, who were
citizens and residents of the State of Mis-
souri,, from that State into this State, and
sold by the petitioners as agents of such
shippers and importers, in the original
packages in which it was shipped by its
owners into this State; that they sold liquor
. In no other manner, and that so far as tire
Constitution and laws Of. this state make
such sales of liquor CT me they are in con-
nict with the CONNIE rcial clause of the Con-
stitution of the United States and void.
The uncontradicted evidence supports the
allegations of the petitioners namely, that
certain persons and firms, residing and
doing business i'm the State of Missouri,
owned and shipped from that State into this
State distilled liquors and beer, and that the
petitioners, as agents for said shippers and
importers, sold NsHfd liquor in this state in
the original packages in which it was
shipped into the state by its owners, and
sold liquors In no other manner.
With an exception not material to be con.
sidered in this case, the Constitution and
laws of this State make it a crime for any
person to sell liquor in this State.
The Constitution and laws of the State
make!no distinction between the Importer,
who sells in the original packages. and one
who sells broken packages, o. by the glass,
The law infiicts the same punishment on
both.
Every question of law raised in these cases
has been decided by the Supreme Court of
the United States.
- That Court IN n recent decision says !. sThat
ardent spirits, distilled liquors. ale and beer,
are subjects of exchange, barter and traffic,
like any other. com alodiiy in which a right
OF traffic exists, and are so recognized by the
usages of the commercial world the laws of
Congress, and the decision of courts, is not
denied Being thus articles of commerce
can State. In the absence of legislation on
the part of Congress, prohibit their importa-
tion from abroad or from a sister state? or
when imported, prohibit the sale by the i'm
porter?'
These questions that Court answered in
the negative, and that anSwer Is conclusive
on this and all other courfs in this country.
The Court referring TO the laws of Iowa,
which, like the laws of this State make it
unlawful for the importer to sell said:
1.-THE plaintiffs in error are citizens of Illi-
nois; are not pharmacists and have no per-
NIT, but import into Iowa beer, which they
sell in original packages, as described. I'm
ms hnafG f H., H.,
Railway Company (supra) they had the right
to import this beer into that State, and in the |
view which we have expires ed they had the |
right to sell it, by which act alone it would |
become mingled in the common mass of |
property within the State. Up to that point |
of time we held that, In the aDsc,fee Of Con-
gressional pc mission to do so, the State had !
no power to interfere by seizure, or any I
other action, in prohibition of importation |
and sale, by the foreign, non resident i'm, |
porter. = |
1.-THE legislation in question is to the extent |
Indicated repugnant to the third clause of |
section of part first of the Constitution of |
the United States" - '''..-.
1t was, then, no offense for these petition-
ers to sell liquor in the original package.
rs agents for the non resident importers and |
owners. E..# o.
Having n right to make such sales under
The Constitution of the United States, as con-
strued by the Supreme Court of the United
states, any imprisonment of them for doing
hat act, is, in the lar guage of the Habeas
Corpus act,t Sin violation 5of TIE Con- I
stitutiOn of the United States and
Illegal, and this court has the jurisdic.
ion," and it is made its duty, to discharge
Inv person so illegally held in Gus
ody. question was raised in the argu-
nent as to whether the smallness of soma of /
he packages sold by some of the petitioners
lid not deprive them of the protection given
o vendors of original packages. Single
'ottles of beer and whisky, packed and
ealed or nailed up in boxes, made of PASTE
'oard or wood, were shipped and sold in
hat shape. The boxes containing one bot
lie were not packed In any other box, but
hipped singly and separately, as so many
distinct and separate packages. ~
1t Is not perceived whyin the absence of
equation by Congress to the contrary, the
importer may. not determine himself the
orm and size OF the package he puts up for
xport. The idea that small packages of
iquor can not be treated as original pack
ges, because they are small, springs from
he conviction back of it, that liquor in any
orm, or in any sized package, is not a Iegit-
mate subject OF eonimerce That
uestion is put at rest by the de-
tates until Congress shall act. As long as
ackages of liquor in any form OF size may
awfuily be sold by the importer or his
gent, in Prohibition state, the size of
he package Is not of much conseauepce.-k
Whether the package be large or small, the
PRACTICAL effect win be 10 seriously impa r
ne efficiency of 8 all laws intended to
rotect society from the liquor traffic.