St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1890-11-01
COVERS THE QUESTION.
Judge Caldwell Holds That o. P.'s
Are Shut Out of Iowa,

are smut Out OF Iowa.
LITTLE Rock. Ark. Oct. 31.-The
opinion of Judge Caldwell. of the United
States circuit court, in the original
package case of I'll. M. Van Vliet, of
Iowa, was filed here to-day. 1t discusses
all the questions raised, and exte nds
over more than fourteen typewriter
pages. The court holds that the act of
congress and the laws of the state are
valid. The following are some of the
salient points in the opinion: By the
act OF congress the right which the i'm
porter previously enjoyed of selling
liquor III the original package in the
state where the transit ended regard
less OF the laws of such state is taken
away, the act declaring that the
liquor ''shali upon its arrival in such
state or territory be subject to
the operation and defect of the
laws of such state." After citing the
authorities and the act of congress, the
opinion proceeds: "It will be observed
that by the terms OF the act the original
package, upon arivar in the state, is
put OH the same footing with liquors
produced in the state. The original
package, when it arrives within the
state where the transit terminates, is at
liquor. enjoys 10 privileges not enjoyed
by domestic liquors, and is subject to
the operation and effect of the laws of
such state enacted In the exercise of
It's political powers, to the same extent
ana Ill the same manner as domestic
liquor. Now. there never was any QueS-
ton that the laws of Iowa prohibited
the sale of liquor produced in the state
and that the laws for this purpose were
constitutional. These laws were in full
force at the date of the passing of the
act OF congress. and that act hav-
ing. in legal effect, abolished
original packag s on their ARRIVAL
within the state by placing them on the
same footing with liquor produced with
Ill the state, they are as much amenable
to the state law as if they had never ex-
listed i'll the form of original packages.
Congress may regulate interstate COM
merce but not intraSSate commerce. 1t
may regulate commerce among the
states, but not in the states. The state
lray regulate purely internal, but not
Interstate commerce. The act is drawn
In view OF those settled principles. 1t
protects the Interstate transportation Of
liquor until its arrival i'll the state
where the transit is to end, and no
longer. Upon its arrival in the state
the act OF congress declares that it shall
be subject to the laws Of the state. 1t
Is said the supreme court has declared
these laws unconstitutional in so far as
they prohibited the sale of liquors by
the importer or his agent in the
original packages, and that congress
could not i'll the language of the learned
counsel, ''vivify dead statute" There
are two answers to this contention. The
hrst is, the act of congress relegates the
original package Of liquor OH its arrival
III the state to the laws of the state,
passed in the exercise of it's police pow
ers. and there is not now. nor ever has
been any doubt of the validity of those
laws. 1t is not the laws of the state,
but the original package Is dead. The
obvious design and intention of con-
gress was to withdraw at once the pro-
tecting shield of interstate commerce
from original packages of liquor the
moment they entered the state where
their transit was to end by placing them
on the footing of liquor produced in the
state, and declaring they be subject to
the same laws. This is what the su-
preme court, as construe their opinion,
had said congress might do, and it is
what it did do, in language that admits
of no evasion or discussion.