Peninsula enterprise. [volume] (Accomac, Va.) 1881-1965, 1890-04-12


The law passed at the recent
session Of our Legislature for the
inspection of all dressed meat, pork
excepted. offered for sale one hnn-
dred miles from the place where
killed. has been declared as nncon-
stitutional by Judge Robert w.
Hughes of the United States Cir
emit Court and 1t hardly seems to
I've questioned, that Judge Hughes
will be sustained by the United
States Supreme Court. The Judge
in delivering his opinion, among
other things, SAYS:
IT. is undcniahle that State of
the Union. like MI other self gov
erning States, has the power TO
enact inspection laws for the nnb-
lie safety. It has a clear right TO
this power as it has TO existence.
IT may enact and enforce inSpec.
t'on laws adopted to secure the
public safety even thoughit trench
upon and more or less obstruct the
freedom of trade between the
States. 1t is equally true. howev.
er, that inspection laws to he with.
III the sovereign prerogative ofthe
State 70 stand superior to the card
inal provisions OF the National
Constitution. must be essentially
and really such in character. pur.
pose and opinion. To call law an
inspection law does not make If
one competent TO override any
term OF constitutional law. #
must he an Inspection law in spirit
lone IN trnrf--in order that it's
character AS snch shall he respect
ed. and though it he in its essence
and design an inspection law. vet
in order that it may not be Snbor
dinatcd TO the provision Of the
Constitution establishing the free
dom of interstate commerce. if
mnst he q reasonable law. properly
devised for preventing the evil at
which tits aimed. and so devised
as not TO snbserve other objects
nnesscntial to the pnblic safety.
When inspection laws chosen for
these latter ends. and thereby af-
tcct foreign commerce or trade he
tween tie States, it is competent
for the national courts. it is made
their solemn duty to pronounce
them invalid and to forbid their en-
forrement. The Supreme Court
rules, continued Judge Hughes.
for inspection charges upon inter
State commerce have been :eouir-
ing only they he reasonable.
The opinion then considers the
question OF whether the Virginia
law complies with thisreqnirement
of the Supreme Tribunal. The
Judge argues that the Virginia
law requires the inspection of
dressed meat and subjects it toiro
Spection charges, while it remains
distinctly 4 commodity of inter
State commerce In this respect
such law is emphatically con
demned by Chief Justice Marshall.
For this reason, if there we're no
other, this court may take cogni.
zance of the Case. The opinion
then considers the question wheth-
er this law was necessary TO the
public health and safety. s.This'n
1t says. sis not associated in the
act itself, and'itis in no way shown;
ON the contrary, it is Il matter Of
common knowledge that though
cried, canned and cooked meats
may while IN the market, contract
elements Of poison or decay not
detachable by consumers, vet that
fresh meats like unSonnd reveal
this fact. The Judge then discuss
es the question as if the law were
necessary from a hygienic view.
The unreasonableness of the in.
spection fees charged, he says. are
unknown 10 the inspection laws.
These heavy fees imposed by the
law, the Court says, suggests that
its real purpose was prohibition,
nn