The Globe-republican., 1890-10-22

facto law, or law impartfng the obligavluu OF
contracts" suppose state should pass any
of thes- prohibited acts and after its passage
the Constitution should be amend d by the
assent of the requisite number OF States, and
the foregoing section dropped altogether, SO
that there was no longer any restriction on
the States in this particular. Would any
one contend that a prior enactment in the
face of the Constitution dead at the time of
its enactment for the want of life giving
power, would at once arise from its tomo
and become a living, actual, lawful thing7
Suppose the Legislature OF Kansas, in
these times of imputed financial distress.
should enact a law providing that in all
cases OF judicial sales of real estate here.
after made ON foreclosure of mortgages
there should be stay OF execution for one
year after judgment. such a law would
seem fair on its face. and would be In gen.
eral terms like that of the Prohibitory law Of
the State. The courts unques;ionabfy would
hold that as to judgm- mt rendered or mort
cages executed prior to such enactment the
statute was inops rative and void, becauss 1t
impaired the obligation of contra cts, and
was in violation OF section ten, article one,
OF the Constitutions; although 1t might be
held to be valid law as to subsequent con-
tracts, good in part and bad in part Now,
suppose the Constitution should be amended
and section ten should be excluded, could it
u
ure would become a valid law as to prior
contras Is without further legislation?
Where is the distinction between the sup
posed case and the case at bar? In either
case the Legislature undertook to legislate
on matter forbidden to it by the Constitu.
ton; in the one case prohibited in terms
and in the other taken away and denied to
it by a delegat on Of all power over the SUBJ
1ect matter to Congress.
If the at ftu tiOn lifv M tho WiIsop hill
is to be upheld upon the theory, as claimed
by its advocates In the debate thereon in
the Senate of the United States and in the
argument at this hearing, that Congress,
In the exercise of its power to regulate
commerce among the States and with
foreign nations. simply decided or de-
clared that its jurisdiction should be con-
fined to certain subjects matter of COM
merce, or that certain subjects matter
and things which may be considered
subjects of commerce, should thereafter be
excluded from its jurisdict on under the
commercial clause of the Constitution, and
the traffic in intoxicating liquors should
thereafter be classified and RENTED to the
subjects with the police power of the state,
such a law under every rule of con-
structon must be prospective in the
operation. And it must further be
conceded that as the right of the
State to treat such an article of commerce,
"a subject to laws passed by the State in the
exercise of the police power, comes for the
first time and alone from the enactment OF
the Wilson BILL until the State passes a law
thereafter forbdding such traffic, it has
never exercised the power or the discretion,
call il what you may, lodged in it by Con-
gress. From this conclusion We see no log.
ical escap".
The operation and scope of criminal laws
should not be ENLARGED by implication, but
they should be strictly construed And
where there is any well founded doubt as to
any act being a public offense, especially
one not nahum in Sc, it should not be de.
clared such, but should rather be construed
in favor of the liberty Of the cit m. 1t fol.
lows tnat the petitioner Is entitled to be dis.
charged, and it is accordingly SO ordered