The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1890-08-02
SINGLE PACK AGES.

The discussion of the bill in Con
gress to overcome the evil effects Of
the single package decision OF the SUI
preme Court of the United States, in
stead of clearing up only increases the
difficulties which that decision in
wolves. If the broad claim Of that de-
cisOn, that any article Of commerce.
no matter what, brought into any
state of the Union from any foreign
country or any other state of the
| Union, can be sold in the latter state
as long as it remains in the original
package. no matter what may be the
state regulation to the contrary, then
undoubtedly there is taken from the
state one Of the highest powers known
to government, and as the essence
Of state sovereignty consists in its
power to enact any laws essential to
protect the morals, the health or the
safety of its people, this power is gone
and state sovereignty over its domestic
affairs becomes myth. For the de-
cision does not extend to liquor alone
but involves every commodity of inter
state commerce. In every state there
is legislation against adulterated food
tea, milk, &c; against adulterated
lard, against butter frauds against
adulterated drugs, against the sale of
poisons, opium, &c; against traffic in
immoral publications. All such legis-
lation is annulled by the decision Of
the Supreme Court so far as it may af-
feet interstate commerce.
AS the Hon. Ezra b. Taylor, of Ohio,
in "a speech on the pending bill in Con-
gress declared:
For it is true-and calm considera-
ton must ascertain it to be the truth
that IL State cannot protect the
morals and health and safety Of its
own people 1t is no longer State. Ii
a State has no police power that can
not be overriden in relation TO this
traffic, then there Is no such thing as
State sovereignty, there is no such
thing as the existence Of an independ-
ent state.
There has never been such a blow
given to State sovereignty and States
rights as is given by the decision to
which | have referred-that under the
constitution Of the United States the
citizens of Il foreign country or the cit
liens Of a foreign state may take into
any state of this Union property that
is the subject Of commerce, and there
sell IL without liability to taxation, to
the burden of licenses or to any other
state enactment.
Such being the wide scope of power
claimed for the general government
by the decision, is 1t practicable for
Congress. under its power TO regulate
commerce between the states, to eX-
cept the single article of liquor, or
that and one or two other specific arti-
cles, from the operation of the general
law? The discussions in the house
and senate raise serious difficulties on
that point. The power to regulate
commerce between the states, it is
maintained, being exclusive in Con-
gress, cannot be delegated in whole or
piecemeal to the states? Can it trans
fer to the states a part of its authority
without undertaking to modify the
constitution by its own act?
The ''nub" OF the whole case is that
the constitutional principle as hereto
fore understood and recognized by
hundreds of decisions of the Supreme
Court itself, has been, that power to
regulate commerce between the states
is exclusive in Congress, and what is