Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1890-10-22
THE rUDDLE WORSE MUDDLED.

The last phase OF the original pachage
decisions seems as productive of remark
able theories of law as the first one. The
decision of the United States Supreme Court
opened the Pandora's box of hair-sPlitting
puzzles which carried to their legitimate
conclusions will argue State Jurisprudence
in dozen well-established respects to
complete standstilI. The last decision OF
the Circuit courts puts the finishing touch
by stimulating theories which are most
effective in proving that it has the least pos
sible foundation in logic or common sense.
1t would be hazardous to attempt to criti-
else, at present, the process by which the
Western Circuit Court arrived at the con-
clusion that all the prohibition and license
laws of the State must be re-enacted, before
they can touch the original package trade.
This is for the reason that no full report of
the ruling has vet been published. When
the Federal Reporter gives the text of this
decision we may judge of its reasoning.
But the reasoning which some of our CO.
temporaries credit to this decision is Gel
tainly of such character as to call for COM
ment An example of the sort is furnished
by the New York Commercial Advertiser,
whose editorial comments on such points are
generally entitled to much respect. That
journal summarizes the supposed logic of
the decision as follows:
The Wilson bill did not re-enact State laws
governing imported liquor, but simply per
mitted their re-enactment Until the State
Slofrt II anfi0 fhar mn
law forbidding original package saloons. The
old acts being unconstitutional were STILL
born, and there was nothing in the Wilson bill
which gave life to that which was dead.
Whether this is purely the reasoning of
our cotemporary or is the actual logic of the
Judges. it falls to the ground from the
cogent fact that the decision of the Supreme
Court did not declare the State laws in
question unconstitutional. and that there
fore they are not still-born. The laws are
the prohibitory legislation of the Western
States that have been declared constitu-
tional, time and again, so far as the
jurisdiction of the State legislation ex-
tends. The first original package decision
held that the State laws could not apply
to Interstate commerce, and that the
trade in original packages was Interstate
commerce. 1t is aside from the present ques-
tion that this was entirely court-made con-
stitutional provision, and it is also not at
issue whether Congress can make a regula-
tive enactment to the effect that the traffic
shall be regulated by certain enactments
specified. But as to the above theory, in
stead of the laws being still-born, as stated
in the above extract, they were in undis-
puted force, each in the State where it was
enacted. Congress having therefore pro-
vided that interstate liquor traffic shall be
regulated by the laws in force in the States
where it is carried on, itdesignated, it not dead
and unconstitutional laws, but live and
effective ones, and placed the traffic which it
has power to regulate subject to their juris-
dictio1. The theory that the re-enactment
of the State laws is necessary because the
first original package decision wiped them
out, is destroyed for the simple reason that
it is contrary to the fact.
A very good illustration of this particular
issue can be drawn from the relation which
diplomatic representatives of foreign coun-
tries have toward the police laws of the
countries where they are serving. Under
present international law they are not SUBJ
ject to the laws of the country to which they
are accredited. But If some foreign
Government should get in advance
of that old theory sufficiently to enact by
treaty or otherwise, that its consuls or at
taches in this country shall be subject to our
police regulations, would it be necessary for
every legislative body in this country to
enact over again Its laws against petty lar
ceny or disorderly conduct before any foreign
representative could be punished for such
offenses? If it were, it could not be for the
reason that the laws designated were null;
for the very act would specify laws in active
force and place the subjects of the legislative
authority under their control.
1t is hard to say where this original pack
agemuddle MAY not lead us; but if the theories
which are accredited to the courts are their
real logic, it makes it most likely that the
courts have chopped the logic of the case
into such fine chaff that the only way out of
the muddle will be for each State to furnish
Congress with copy OF its regulative legis-
lation, and for Congress to enact exactly that
legislation with regard to the liquor i'm
ported into that State.
T,u