Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1890-06-04

foolish, within the express powers of Con-
gress, and it is no new assumption OF
power, and it cannot be said, if it prevails.
to strengthen any more the arm of Fed
eral authority, since it has already all the
vigor, so far as the regulation of COM
merce is concerned, that it is possible to
give to it.
But we can understand the perplexity
of the Journal referred to. 1t is unde-
cided as yet concerning the wisdom of the
proposed legislation, and the RECORD
UNION is also in doubt about it, though
its inclination is to look with fear upon
the experiment Congress is asked to make.
For if there is to be exception concerning
liquors in favor of States that wish to ex-
clude them, the next demand will be made
by those States which have set up inspec-
tion laws for food meats, providing that no
meats shall be sold in the State that have
not been inspected in the State "upon the
hoof." Quite as strong showing is made
in their favor as in behalf of the prohibi-
ton States. Here, for instance, is Mime
sofa saying, we cannot, with our stall-fed
cattle, compete with the range cattle Of
the farther West, hence we will exclude
meats not inspected in the State before
slaughter, and Congress, in conservation of
self-government, must follow the precedent
set by its action in favor of Iowa, in the
exclusion of liquors, and exempt beef NUT
ton and veal from the operations of the
interstate law, so far as Minnesota is con-
cerned. As the Chronicle we'll says in
the midst of its involved article, the
danger resides in the emulation of such
laws. ''The taking of one step makes the
next the easier" and presently we will be
restored to the original condition of affairs
when the States were independent of each
other, and of general regulative authority
for commerce.
1t appears to US, as we look upon the
issue, that the Supreme Court has left the
question in the best possible condition. 1t
has decided that the general regulation
established by Congress for commerce be-
tween the States is uniform in its opera
ton and impartial. That SO soon, how
ever, as importation into one State from
another has accomplished the transit in
the original unbroken package and the
goods mingle with and become part os
the common property within the State
they are subject to State regulation. That
therefore it Is competent for a State to pro-
hibit the distribution of such goods after
they have arrived in the State, and have
been delivered to the consignee.
What Congress might do, however, and
about which there would or should be no
dispute, would be to interpret anew the
word commerce" and declare that ship
ment into State of goods in such small
packages as to practically amount toretail-
ing, and evasion Of local regulation, is
not an act of commerce. With such de-
fuition the prohibition States would GER
tainly be content, and there would not be
any breaking down by it of the interstate
commercial regulation that the builders
of the Constitution wisely provided should
be committed to Congress. but certainly
with the intention that such regulation
should be uniform and operative alike in
all parts of the Union