Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1890-05-21
NATIONS CAPITAL.
Shall Imported Liquors be
Subject to Stlte Laws?
United States Court Rearing on the
Ksnmlsg WHIT Of nEror cass.

United States Court BEARING on the
Ksnnla Wris Of HEror Cas-.
WAsHrxGrox. Nay 3o--Hoar present
ed remonstrAnces signed By several Boston
| hrms against the great iscfease of duties
| proposed in the Mckinley bill on silk goods,
plushes and velvets.
Ingalls introduced bin TO abolish metal
money. He said he did % 1t the request
Of the wage workers political alliance of
Washington, d. c.
The Senate proceeded to consider the
bill reported from the judiciary committee
! subjecnng imported liquors to sAe provis-
ions Of the laws Of the several S.. aes.
Wilson Of Iowa stated the hill vas made
necessary by the recent dscision of the
supreme court on thai subject.
Vest said that % . menber Of the Judi.
ciary committee he had not been able to
agree with the majority in reporting the
bill. because it would sweep away the ex-
elusive jurisdiction Of the United States
report had been read. dissenting from the
views Of the majority. and signed by Viii
son of lows, Ingalls,, Edmunds And Hosr.
AA5 AAsAhVhhhy IcROAt I'M pG0u 8CCvmp2Qltu
BY bill to provide that the payment Of any
import or excise tax should not exempt the
importer Of Al article from liability to the
laws of State. Vest resumed argument
against the pending bill. The real ques.
ton. be said, was whether Congress could
delegate the pOs vested in il by the con-
stitution to any State or any number of
States. He believed it could not. To do so
would be to destroy the Interstate clause
In the constitution, and Ill purposes for
which It wAs eaacted.
At 2 O'Clock the silver bill came up 40
unfinished business, and laid aside as in.
formal to continue the consideration Of the
measure under discussion
Vest resumed the argument. he said il
this bill was passed, it would open up op-
portunities for suscessive series OF such
bills, just A. emergencies or opinions of
different States might call for that sort Of
legislation.
Hoaf favored the bill. II the bill was
no: within the legislative sover of Congress
then there was no more miserable nation
on the face of the earth, than the United
States. He supposed there did not exist
community where the danger of permitting
the unrestricted sale of intoxicating liquors
was not recognized and guarded sgainst by
public authority. Unless what was pro-
posed in this bill (or something equivalent
could be done, there would b. the Law in
the United States for all future time (un-
less consttutionally amended in thst re.
spect). That any person living in another
State or foreign country, could send intcxi.
eating liquor into any State, and dispose of
it there, and it should not be competent for
any State authority to prohibit it.
Hiscock asked Hosr whether. if the
State desired to exclude the manufactures
Of WOOL, was within the power of Con-
gress to delegate to the States power to
do so.
Hoar replied that he did not 90 quite
that far but the question mooted was on
boundary lines between the two conflict
ing powers, the police powers of the State
and the exclusive power Of Congress over
interstate commerce. The State
had certainly original and primary power
to say that nobody should sell intoxicating
liquors or opium to . child 10 years old,
and that Congress had the power to say
whether the right to engage in interstate
commerce should not be understood to al
low an Eaglishman or citizen from another
State, by himself, or his agent, to sell in
toxicating liquor or opium to child 10 years
old. If that can be done Congress might
90 further and say whether the right to en-
gage in Interstate or international COM
merce should not be understood as permit
ting any body to sell opium or Intoxicating
liquors to any body else.
Hiscock assumed that the presence of
the bill was due to the fact that unless it
became law the State would be limited
or restricted in power over the subject He
accepted very doubtfully the proposition
that Congress had constitutional power to
delegate to any State power to prohibit the
importation or sale within it's borders of
wheat butter. or other products of the farm
or factory. He thought 1t might be wise
to pass the bill and leave it to the supreme
court to decide upon.
Reagan said if the matter to be debated
upon was the propriety of regulating or
controlling the use of intoxicating liquors
that would be one subject, but il it was to
be discus sed As to the authority bv which
it was to be regulated that ould be another
subject. The supreme court had repe ated
ly decided that the power of Congress to
regulate Interstate commerce was as com.
plete and perfect as the power of the State
to regulate its internal commerce. What
ever might be his wish to see tempe rance
promoted in the land he Was not willing 10
lay his hands on the consti ution and tear
ii down.
Edmunds remarked that q condition of
things had been reached where, according
to debate and the judgment Of the supreme
court, the States had no power to deal with
subject and Congress had no power to
deal with it. The result was, there was in
every man in one State an inherent, indi-
vidual, personal right to carry into another
State what that State might consider inju-
rious to its safety. and there TO sell it, that
Congress had no power to stop it and that
States could not stop it unless Congress
gave them that power. The supreme court
might chang its opinion next year and say
that the rule should be the other way. He
did not feel embarrassed by the fact that
the supreme court had taken the longest
step ever taken within q hundred years, in
| the republic, towards Capitalization Of pow
er somewberes, either in the supreme court
or in Congress. He did not believe in GEN.
ralizstion of power.
He believed in it's segregation and separa.
ton in every respeci, Speaking of the
| importation of intoxicating liquors into
State, Edmuds claimed that once they got
there they we're the subject Of the State
laws. That was what the Supreme Court
of the United ates would come to within
the next tu enty years. II might be said
that it would interfere with the revenue of
the United SA:es. But the power of the
United States to regulate commerce and
levy taxes 10 no grea-er within its sphere
than is the power of States to deal with the
commodities AMI conduct of its people
within their sphere. Both powers are
supreme each had to be exefted 10 its own
order. The constitution had declared that
Congress should have the power to regulate
commerce among the States, and left to
States the power to deal with the objects Of
commerce after they got there.
After further discussion the bill went
over without action. ard the Senate pro
ceeded TO the consideration of the resolu.
tons offered by Cameron in respect to the
memory Of the late Representative VIM.
d. Kelly Of Pennsylvania
Remarks in eulogy of the character of
Mr.. Kelly were made by Cameron. Morrill,,
Reagan. Sherman, Hampton, Ha~ley and
Daniel. Then the Senate, a. . further
mark of respect TO the memory Of Kelly,
adjourned.
The House Considers Amendmsnts ou
the Tariff Bill