The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1893-07-26
JUDGE auDsoN,s DECISION

One Of tho Ablest and Oldest Members oi
tho Anderson Bar Gives His Opinion OF
the Decision.
Mr., EDITOR: You have asked me for
an article in relation to Judge Hudson's
dec,sion holding the Dispensary Law to
be unconstitutional. Ihave thought that
this law as revenue measure would be
success, notwithstanding all that has
been said against it, but if it be viola
ton of the Constitu ton of the State it is
an usurpation of power we cannot afford
to justify upon such consideration.
This, is question for the decision OF
the Supreme Court, upon calm and i'm
partial consideration of all the interest
ing questions raised by Judge Hudson in
his decision. His objections to the Act
are numerous, and some of. them no
doubt well founded, but that which par
ticularly struck me was the direct con-
;flict between the principles OF constltu-
tional law announced by him, and some
of the pernicious doctrines which are
being disseminated among our people IN
reference to the powers and functions of
government, and which are embodied In
some of the political platforms. 1t is this
very conflict of opinion that has pro-
yoked the injudicious threats that he
must be oecapitated, and which may be
made the subject of discussion without
Invading the province of the Supreme
Court.
Judge Hudson holds, no doubt correct
IL, that the police power Iof the State
must be exercised subject to constitu-
tional limitations. That the Dispensary
Act, In so far as it prohibits the manufac-
ture and sale Of Intoxicating liquors, is a
proper exercise Of this power, and to that
extent the Act is constitutional: But
what he denies, as understand him, is
that the Constitution contains any dele
CATION of power, either in express terms
or by necessary implication, authorizing
the Legislature to confer on any other
branch of the government the exclusive
right to trade and cratic in Intoxicating
LIQUORS, and to tax the people to carry on
the business. He maintains that trade
and commerce are not proper functions
of government, and that ii the Legisla-
.trre, in the exercise of its police power,
can confer on any branch OF the govern
ment monopoly In one business, 1t can
confer a like monopoly in another, and
That such q doctrine logically pursued
would lead to the overthrow OF Republi-
can government. He alfirms the right Of
the State to either regulate or totally pro-
hibit the manufacture and sale of intOXi-
eating LIQUORS, but what he denies Is that
the Legislature can confer on any other
branch Of the government monopoly OF
the business, for If 1t can confer mo-
nopoly In one business 1t can confer q
like monopoly in another, and 30 on un-
til the whole business Of the country IS
monopolized by the State. And this is
precisely the condition of things advo-
Gated by the Socialists. 1t may be argued
in favor Of the law that it is q proper ex-
ercise Of the>polioe power because it be-
longs to the lie. islature to enact all such
wholesome and reasonable laws not re-
pugnant to the Constitution as shall be
for the good Of the commonwealth and
its citizens that intemperance is great
evil, and the fruitful source OF poverty
and crime, and that the Act is a Constitu-
tional exercise Of this power. inasmuch
as 1t is but another method for the regu-
lation of the evil. Now let us see wheth-
ercise of this police power upon precisely
|
views. They believe in the abrogation of
Che institution of property, that It should
all belong to the State, which should fur
nish employment to it's citizens and reg
ulate their pay. And it is plank in the
Peoples Party platform, according to my
notes, that "the land, including all the
natural sources of wealth, Is the heritage
of all the people" and Gen. Field, who
was candidate with Gen. Weaver for
the Presidency and Vice Presidency on
this platform, is reported to have said In
speech at Atlanta that he wanted to see
the day come when the land will belong
to all the people. This is the doctrine of
Mr.. Henry George, who denounces the
Individual ownership of land as robbery.
He says that it is the evil which under
lies all our social and political discomfort
that it has caused those nonstrous in
euualities in the distribution of wealth
so much complained of, and that it is the
fruitful source of all the pauperism and
crime which everywhere exist. He
maintains, with the insolence Of injns-
tice, that the State should confiscate 1t
without compensation to the owner, by
taxing it to the full extent Of its rental
value, and that by letting it out to the
highest bidder the State would raise q
revenue which would make it possible
for it to assume tho running Of railroads,
telegraphs and other businesses, which
being monopolies cannot be safely left in
the hands of private individuals or cor
porations, and to show what he thinks
are proper functions of government, I
will quote his language; 1.-THE govern
ment would thus gradually become the
administrative agent of the great corpo-
I1 nd 10
numerous followers may insist that they
present case precisely similar, and de-
mand an exercise of this police power on
the very same grounds to remedy the
evils of which they complain. Does any
man in his right senses suppose that the
trainers OF our republican Constitutions
ever thought of comforting on our govern
ments-State or Federal-any such pow
ers7 and yet this literature is being scat
tered broadcast over the land, in blue and
gilt, and is making converts to these doc
trines among well-meaning people, who
donot appreciate the fact that in EN- bracing
them they must of necessity decide
whether they prefer the government of
the Socialist or the one they have, for
they cannot co.e4lst. Such doctrines in
corporated into The fundamental law of
any State would raise the question Wheth-
or it would not be the duty of Congress
to interfere and set 1t aside, under that
clause of the Federal Constitution which
makes it the duty of the United States to
guarantee every State In the Union a re-
publican form of government. Such
doctrines are revolutionary, and be-
lieve that our people, when they under
stand them, will reppdiate them.
know OF nothing more important to
the interests of our people than Judi
ciary composed of men distinguished for
their ability and integrity, and it is
equally important that they should be
free to decide all matters brought before
them according to their best judgment.
Our government has been said to be one OF
checks and balances, and it was made so
to protect the liberties OF the people. The
inn portant duty of declaring an Act of
the law-making power unconstitutional
has been devolved on the Courts, but
when Judge on the Bench, under the
solemn sanction of an oath, to administer
Justice according to his best judgment, is
given to UNDERSTAND that his tenure OF
Office depends, not upon conscientious
discharge of duty according to bis convic-
tions, but upon his willingness to conform
his decisions to popular opinion, what
becomes of that independence of the
judiciary, so necessary to enable it to
perform its proper functions under our
form of fgovernment. The Judge is placed
upon the bed of Procrnstes; Ifhe fits it
we'll and good-if he Is too long he must
be cut Off to suit; ii he is too short he
m ,st ha n,ada lon1, enOugh bV stretching