Omaha daily bee., 1890-05-16
THE TupoRrED LToUoR QUESTION.


The bill of Senator Wilson of Iowa,
subjecting imported liquor to the pro-
visions Of the laws of the several states,
has reached the calendar Of the United
States senate, and its author gave notice
that he would ask the senate TO take
IL up for consideration at an early day.
Senator Hoar, in explaining that the
bill was rendered necessary by the late
decision OF the supreme court, said that
he fully concurred in the purport of the
measure, but supposed the principle Of
the courts opinion was extended to other
things than distilled spirits-to opium
for instance--and he should have pre-
ferred that the bill should have applied
to all articles which states might desire
to prohibit the sale Of" There is sug-
gestion in this of the wide range which
congress may ultimately be called upon
to take, in the exercise OF its power to
remove the restriction upon the state
in dealing with imported articles should
the bill proposed by Senator Wilson be-
come law
There is, of course, no question regard
ing the authority of congress to enact
such law. The supreme court decision
distinctly says that congress may by act
give permission to state TO prohibit the
importation of liquor from another state,
and such importation cannot be inter-
fered with in the absence Of congress
sional permission. The authority of con-
gress in this respect is unlimited, cX-
tending to any and all articles of com
mcrce. 1t may empower a state to pro-
hibit the importation of meats, as some
Of them have sought to do, or any other
article of produce or manufacture
which Legislature may declare it to
be necessary to exclude in the in
terest of the public health or morals.
Suppose congress started upon the exer-
else of this authority in allo wing the
states to prohibit the importation of
liquor, where would the demand for
such congressional interference be likely
TO end and what would be the limit Of
possible obstruction to interstate com
merce? States producing liquor would
endeavOr to retaliate upon the prOduc-
tions of states which excluded liquor.
There might arise continual conflicts
growing out of legislation among the
states discriminating against the pro-
ducts of each other, and congress would
bo besieged at every session to recognize
such legislation. There would be in
spection laws and license regulations in
Vulnerable, all professedly in the public
interest and a rightful exercise of the
police powers of the states, but in intent
and purpose retaliatory. Is it wise to
invite such possible state of affairs?
The legislation proposed by Senator
Wilson would obviously not only do this,
but it would be u most arbitrary and in
tolerable interference with the liberty of
the citizen. 1t would prevent persons
from importing liquors for their own
use, except under conditions which
would be troublesome and annoying, and
which might subject them to hardship
and abuse at the hands of ignorant or
malicious officials.
1t seems to us there are very strong
and serious objections to the proposed
legislation, and that the matter is one
which congress may wisely and
safely allow to regulate itself.
The decision of the supreme court
does not diminish the power Of the
states to regulate the liquor traffic, and
congress would exercise dangerous au-
thority in giving permission to one state
to exclude the product of another and at
the same time deny to the citizen the
right to purchase and possess for his
own use common article of commerce.