The Atlanta constitution. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1885-19??, 1894-04-23
BARS IN FULL BLAST.
SUPREME COURT DECLARES THE
DISPENSARY UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Blind Tigers Open Their Eyes-The Governor
Has Little to Say-He IL Doing some
Thinking Now-The Law Mixed.

Columbia, S. c., April 1s.--(Special.)-Th
has been great day In South Carolina.
"Blind tigers are blind no more. They are
winking the other eye, for the highest legal
tribunal In the state has officially con-
demned to death their deadly enemy-the
dispensary law.
At 10 o'clock this morning the expected
decision of the supreme court was hled,
sustaining the decision of Judge Hudson
declaring in express terms the old law I'M
constitutional in the very features that are
embodied in the act, thus In effect
making, in the opinion Of the leading law
yers, the present law null and void
The decision Of the court was delivered
by Chief Justice McIver coucurred in by
Justice Wallace and dissented from in
lengthy opinion by Justice Pope. Admin
istration leaders are already charging
t..at there Is politics in the decision and
John Gary Evans, who Is popularity sup
posed to be Governor Tillmans f2Eorite can
ddate for governor to succeed him, says
that 1t was dictated by political prejudice
and that Justice Popes opinion viii be
held to be the right one.
Governor Tillman has been sought a score
Of times for an expression concerning the
decision, but for once he has taken Senator
lrby's advice and put a paddock on MS
tongue" declaring that he Will have nothing
to say until he has thoroughly understood
the grounds of the decision. he IS reported
to have remarked that this is only the be
Chief Justice Mciver is popuiarly credlted
being not a syrnpathizer Of tae dGInl,
of Justice MCGOWAN, though no action OF
these has ever shown the slightest pontl-
the bench last year, was attorney Se-l44 aa
under Governor Tillman and had always
been an avowed and ardent Tiilmanite.
Vhc State Cannot sell Liquor.
The decision of the court sustans all the
points made by the counsel for the respond
ents except one. and is a complete annihI"
Iation of the entire state dispensary
1t operates npoI the new act IN ttie SAM SAM
way and to the same extent lflat II ai4IiulS
the old one The new act Is really it
amendment Of the old act in certain par
tic,ilarS which are Indifferent ana lmllla-
terial to the main question. Both o. The
acts depend upon the great single question
whether the state may engage IN me liquo,
business, and the features OF the olo t a
providing for such business are fepeated
and reinforced by the amendments contain.
The best lawyers who have studied the
question that if one falls the other must
fan. 1t may be said that the decision II
made in reference mainly direct to the Ola
act but in any question hereafter 10 &rtSe
the principles announced in the decision VII.
of course control the court with equal force
In the future consideration of the new acI
so that in a strictly technical point o.
declare the new as we'll as the old act
Unconstitutional. IN ali points toucheu
lr,gn in the decision the one act cam"
be differentiated from the other. ~ IS "
In abeyance for a period Of ten days wv IN
IN which the parties are enf1tied to 90 %
fore the court and move for q new near
ing 1t s not probable, however tnat III,
move fol, a rea -eument In order II hay
time within which to put itsei1 IN pos1'l"!!
IA obey the law by hiEroEtn% OF Tue Fl"
in trade now or hand which il would PROB
ABLY have to do by selling the stock IN buik
50 parties outside the state. upon inc -
niration Of the ten days the renlittur Of thf
court win be sent down and the DECISION
win then go into effect as the law OF We