Sturgis advertiser. (Sturgis, Dakota [S.D.]) 1887-1???, 1891-05-28
OFFICIAL PAPER:
Or MEADE COURTr, The cI7Ys or S7URGfs. AND
The war DEPARTMENT. DEPARTMENT BIZ DaKoz.
ORIGINAL PACKAGES.

u II 81
Chief Justice Fuller Decides That The
wilson Law Is valid
The dispatches OF the 25th brings The
good news Of the decision just rendered
by the supreme court. Prohibitioniste
and all law abiding citizens will read the
following with considerable pleasure.
It shows that men have no right to sell
Intoxicating liquors in prohibition states
in original packages. Let the good work
go on. Read what the supreme judges
say:
''The United States supreme court
today upheld the constitutionality Of the
original package law passed by congress
and also held it not necessary for the
state OF Kansas to re-enact it's prohibi-
tory law after the passage OF the con-
gressional act in order to shut out
liquors in original packages. The case
came up on the appeal Of Wilkinson,
sheriff, vs. Rahrer, the lower court hav-
ing 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 announced, however,
that Justices Harlan, Brewer and him
self did not concur in all the reasoning
of the opinion of the court. Rahrer was
an original package agent at Topeka of
Kansas City liquor firm and was arrest
ed the day after the original package
law went into effect. He claimed the
law was unconstitutional and also that
it could not go into operation until the
state reenacted its prohibitory laws
The circuit court decided against the
state and the case was brought here on
appeal.
"The supreme court says the power Of
the state to impose restraints and bur-
dens upon persons and property in the
promotion of public health, good order,
and property is a power always belong
ing TO the states. The power of con-
gress to regulate commerce among the
several states when the subjects are nat
ional in their nature is also exclusive.
A'7---- Left free by the constitution.
except as congress might unuuISuns -
regulate it. Intoxicating liquors are
undoubtly subjects for commerce like
any other commodity, but, nevertheless
it has often been held that laws prohib-
iting the manufacture and sale of liquor
within state limits do not necessarily in
fringe any constitutional privilege or
immunity. This right rests upon the
acknowledged right of states to control
their purely internal affairs. The Iowa
laws held to be unconstitutional in the
Leisy original package case were enact
ed in the exercise of the state police
power, but as it amounted to a regula-
tion OF interstate commerce, it was held
| that so long as congress did not pas any
law to regulate specifically the traffic be.
tween states on intoxicating liquors OF
an act in such away as to allow the state
laws to operate upon it, congress thereby
indicated its will that such commerce
should be free and untrammeled ano
therefore the laws Of Iowa were inoper
ative insofar as they amounted to regu.
1 latons Of foreign or interstate commerce
in inhibiting the reception of sucl
articles within the state or the sale
upon arrival in the form in which import
ed. It follows that when congress act
ed at all, the result Of it's action must b,
| to operate as restraint upon that per
feet freedom which it's silence insured
Congress has now spoken and declares
that imported liquors shall, upon arriya
| in the state, fall within the category an,
domestic articles of similar nature
Congress did not use the terms of per
mission to the state act, but simply re
moved the impediment to the enforce
ment of the state laws in respect to th
imported packages in their importe
packages in their original condition Gre
ated by the absence of a specific utteranc
upon its part. The act of congress r.
moved the obstacle, and no adequat
ground is perceived for holding that th
re-enactment of the state law was n
quired before it could have The effet
upon imported which it always had vi
on domestic property. The jurisdictio
attached not in virtue of the laws OF col
gress, but because that law placed Il
property where jurisdiction could a
tach.
''l The Whitewood Plaindealer comes o1
very boldly for the enforcement Of ii
prohibitory law. The newspapers Of Il
Hills are largely to blame for the disr
spect shown this law, the course OF u
liquor men being sanctioned by the d
ence Of the papers or publicly endors,
and the ADVERTISER has been as loo
as any Of them. It's the duty Of /
\ public journals to demand the enforc
ment 81 every Law upon the statue bool
as life and property are, protected
the careful observance of the fixed rul