Rock Island daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1886-1893, 1891-05-26
THE NATIONS LAW.
The Dictum Of Our Court of
Highest Resort.
ORIGINAL PACKAGE CASE DECISION.


Liability of Directors of National Banks
The Individual Body Declared sa-
cred-Something bout the Projected
Inter- Continental Hailway-Opinion as
to the Third Party, Its Influence and
Purposes What Ewart and PETER Say
A Pension Bureau Man Vindicated.
WASHINGTON CITY May rs The SUI
preme court OF the United States ad-
journed yesterday until the second Mon
day in October. A large number of de-
cions, several of them of general impor-
lance, were rendered by the court. The
most important case decided was that of
John NJ. Wilkerson, sheriff of Shawnee
county, Kan, against Charles II. Rohrer.
This is one of the original package cases,
and it came to the supreme court on an
appeal from ;he Kansas United States cir
cult court. Rohrer was the agent at To-
peka, Kan. for Kansas City, Mo-, liquor
firm. Last year he offered for sale beer
and whisky in oriGina! packages. Rohrer
was arrested for violating the Kansas pro-
hibition law, but the United States circuit
court for Kansas released him on a writ
of habeas corpus. The Kansas authorities
then brought the case to the supreme
court on an appeal.
Powers Forbidden to the state
The court reverses the circuit courts
decree and remands the cause for further
proceedings Chief Justice Fuller, who
read the opinion, reviews at length legal
opinions bearing on the jurisdiction of
. -.
the original package law passed by con-
gress last year, asks the question: as the
law open to constitutional objectionY" In
considering this query the chief Justice
said that by the first clause OF section 10
of article /, of the constitution. certain
powers are enumerated which the states
are forbidden TO exercise in any event:
and by clause ,, certain others which
may be exercised with the consent Of con-
gress. AS TO those in the first class, con-
gress cannot relieve from the positive re-
striction imposed
Those That May Be Authorized.
As TO those in the second, their exercise
may be authorized, and they include the
Q collection of the revenue from imports
and duties on imports and exports by
state enactments, subject to the control
OF congress, and "A tonnage duty to the
eXaction OF which only the consent ofcon-
gress is required. Beyond this Congress
was not empowered to enable the state to
go in this direction. Nor could congress
transfer legislative powers to the state,
nor sanction a state law in violation of
the constitution; and if it can adopt a
state law as its own, it must be one that
IL would he competent itself to enact, and
not law passed in the exercise of the po-
lice power.
What the States Secured.
In surrendering their own power over
external commerce the states did not
secure absolute freedom in such commerce.
but only the protection from encroach-
ment afforded by confiding its regulation
exclusively to congress. By the adoption
OF the constitution the ability of the
several states to act upon the matter
solely in accordance with their own Will
was extinguished and the legislative will
OF the general government substituted
No affirmative guaranty was thereby
given to any state of the right 30 demand.
as between it and the Others, what it
could not have obtained before.
or Interest to Bankers.
In the case of the First National bank
of Buffalo the court rendered a decision
freeing the directors from blame for the
passed into the hands of receiver, who
sued the directors for allowing the presi-
dent of the bank to contract some loans
that resulted disastrously The court
holds that directors of national banks are
not obliged to exercise more than the SUI
pervision usually expected of them, and
that they are therefore not liable for the
failure of the bank because they dill
not supervise the action of the president
in making the loans.
The sanctity of the Person.
Justice Gray rendered the decision of
the court in tue case of Clara l. Botsford,
who was injured in Union Pacific rail
way car, and was awarded damages In
It's decision the court held that the lady
was not obliged TO submit to a physical
examination by the companys physicians
to ascertain her injuries. Such an exam
iantion, the court decides, would be an
invasion Of the sanctity of the person:
had no foundation in law. and had never
been recognized in this country. Justices
Brewer and Brown dissented.
VIII Go to Philadelphia
WAsHIYGToN CITY, May 26-The presi-