The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1894-02-07

Of the ablest expositions of that side,
Of the great case now before the
Court that has been made, and even.
in so full an abstract of it as is
given below. it is difficult to do it
justice:
PROPOSITION FIRST.
Thss Act Is unconstitutional en- the
main principle thereof IN that 1t pro
usdes for tie conduct of the ,ohols basss-
ness of liquor dealing IN the Stete Of
South Carolina By and through the
State commissioners. agents aud employ
ees. In other words. 1t puts the State
into the liquor trade. and the
same with Its business risks and re-
ueaues IS assumed By the State.
aohoAy and enclusiuely conducted By the
State with the public funds Of the put-
lic treasury, and through officers,
agents and employees pad by the State
out Of the public treasury.
The Act provides that the State com
missioners shall purchase al! liquor
for lawful sale in the State, and that
all amounts be paid over monthly to
the Treasurer of the State, and that
the commissioner is to draw warrant
against the treasury from time to
time to pay the expenses .curred in
conducting the business Of said
agency, and provides that the county
dispenser shall not purchase any
Intoxicating liquors except from the
State Commissioners, and $4,000 of
public funds be appropriated for the
purpose of purchasing liquors to be
sold again to private citizens by coun-
ty dispenser, State officer.
Under the provisions of the Act
It is clear that no private person with
private funds or in his own
right conducts or can conduct
their business Of liquor selling, but
that it, is conducted by the State,
its officers, agents and employees
under fixed compensation, with the
public funds and capital of the State
and witt the liquors. the property Of
the State, aud that the profits of such
business go into the public treasury
Of the State and that of the county
and municipality.
Now We submit the State cannot
go into trade; that is into the busi-
ness of buying and selling again
any article to it's citizens. The
business of merchandising is indivi-
dual and private The State cannot
itself engage in, compete in or mono.
police any trade or business, how
ever much it may regulate Or re-
strain or prohibit trade or business
for the general good of the whole.
In the preamble of the Constitu-
ton of South Carolina the object of
that Constitution is eau explicit and
solemn compact with each other" and
s'to form new Constitution of civil
government for ourselves"
In Section ! of article | of the
Constitutions the ..inalienable rights"
are those of property and of the
pursuit of calling and trades aud
business. The rights belong 10 the
individual except when they must
be extinguished for the common
good. They do not belong TO the
State /; trading is not function Of
"civil" government
Section Al. Article l, Constitution
of South Carolins, prescribes: The
enumeration of rights in the Constitu-
tion shall not be construed to impair
or deny others retained by the peo-
pie and all powers not herein dele
gated remain with the people"
THE STATE NO RIGHT. TO TRADE
The right to trade, the CONNER
cial power, is nowhere delegated in
the Constitution. and is reserved by
the people. Other powers are
expressly given and enumerated in
the Constitution as the functions Of
"civil government" but no hint
or suggestion or implication of the
State as trader appears any
where There is no provision for
it. aud no contemplation OF it
in the constitutional framework
of this Government This enumera-
tion in the Constitution of the func-
tions Of "civil government" are
exclusive of commercial and trading
functions, which are not within the
scope, either expressed or implied, of
"civiI government, which is the
design of the Constitution under its
preamble.
This is clearly settled as a matter of