Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1891-05-28
The United States Supreme Court
Decides the Congressional
Act Constitutional.
1t will Not be Necessary for Iowa
to Re-enact Her PrOhib-
tory Law.
Review of the Raherer Case and
Grounds of the Decision
Announced Yesterday.

WASHINGTON, May 25.-T United
States supreme court today upheld the con-
stitu,iolaIity of the original package law
passed by congress, and also held that it
was not necessary for the state of Kansas
to re-enact its prohibitory law after the
passage of the congressional act in
order to shut out liquors in original
packages. The case came up on the
appeal of Wilkinson, sheriff, against
Rahcrer, the lower court having decided
against the state This court reverses the
decision Of the lower court. Chief Justice
Fuller rendered the decision the entire
court being with him. Justice Gray an
nounced, however, that Justices
Harlan, Brewer and himself did
not concur in all the reasoning
of the opinion of the court. Raherer was
an original package agent at Topeka of d
Kansas City liquor firm and was arrested
the day after the original package law went
into effect He claimed that the law was
unconstitutional and also that it could not
90 into operation until the state re-
enacted its prohibitory laws. The cir
cult court decided against the state
and the case was brought here Oh appeal.
The supreme court says the power Of the
state to impose restraints and burdens
upon the people and property in the pro
motion If public health, good order and
prosperity Is 4 power always belonging to
the states. The power Of congress to regulate
commerce among the several states when
subjects are national in their nature is
also exclusive, but it was left free by the
constitution except as congress might
undertake to regulate it. In
toxicating liquors are undoubtedly
subjects of commerce like any other
commodity but nevertheless 1T has often
been held that laws prohibsting the manu-
facture and sale of liquor within state
limits do not necessarily infringe any con-
stltutlOnal privilege or immunity. This
right rests upon the acknowledged right
of the states to control their purely inter
nal affairs. The Iowa laws held to b I'M
constitutional in the Leisy original
package case were enacted In the exercise
of state police power, but as it amounted
to the regulation of interstate commerce,
1t was held that as congress dill
not pass any law to regulate specifically
the traffic between the states on Intoxicat
ing liquors. or act III such way as to al
low the state laws to operate upon it,
congress thereby indicated its will that
such commerce should be free and I'M
lldlllleIFU anu therefore Tue laws OI
Iowa were imperative in so far as they
amounted to regulations of foreign Or
Interstate commerce in the reception Of
such articles within the state or their sale
upon arrival IL the form in which they
are imported 1t follows that when con,
grese acted at all the result Of its action
must be to operate as restraint upon
that perfect freedom which its silence i'll
Sured. Congress has now spoken and de-
clared that imported liquors shall, upon
arrival within the state, fail within the
category Of domestic articles of a similar
nature. Congress did hot use terms of
permission 10 The state to act but simply
removed the impeachment to the enforce
mpnt of the state laws in respect to the
imported packages in their origi-
nal condition, created by the
specific utterance upon its part
The act OF congress removed the obstacle
and no adequate ground is perceived for
holding that re-enactment of the state
law was required before it could
have the effect upon imported,
which it always had upon domestic
property. Jurisdiction attached, not
in virtue of the laws of congress but be-
cause that law placed property where
jurisdiction could attach.