The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1895-05-15

South Carolina, nor is she in any way
party thereto. Certain persons claim
to act in the name of the State, baslug
their claim on The dispeusary law.
Their justification depends on the vail.
dity of that law. and if it or that part
of it which authorizes them to seize and
carry away the property of the COM
plainant under the circumstances charg'
ed in the bill be 10 conflict With the Con-
stitosion of the United States or any
Law made Hereunder, it is null and
vc;a, is as If it never existed, aud they
are left without justification.
The questions made in the bill are
Federal questions. Are the acts com
planned of in violation of the Constitu-
tiop of the United States or Of any law
passed Hereunder
This court, sitting 10 equity, has ju-
diction over the matters stated IN the
bill, to prevent multiplicity of suits.
and because the complainant has no
plain, adequate or complete remedy at
law.
We come then to the allimportant
question 90 the merits of the bill.
Is the provision Of the dispensary
law, which forbids citizen of the State
himself to import for his owu use from
the other States alcoholic liquors sus-
tainable under the act of Congress com
monty known as the Wilson bill 7" 1t
is, if these provisions Of the dispensary
Law are the lawful exercise of the police
power of the State.
The dispensary law nowhere declares
that the use and consumption of alco-
holic liquors in themselves are injurious
to the morals. good health and safety of
the State. or of her people. % the
contrary the dispensary Law makes the
most ample provision for the purchase
of alcoholic liquors 10 this State, and
elsewhere, for their distribution in con-
vepient packages within the reach Of
nearly every person throughout all por-
tions of the State for use and cousump-
ton by the people of the State, and in
every way it encourages such use and
consumption. Even 10 localities in
which the majority Of the inhabitants
refuse to have dispeusary, provision
is made for the procurement of alcoholic
lie liquor by chose persons within the
locality who desire to use it. Alcoholic
liquor is declared to be contrabaud and
against morals. good health aud safety
of the State, only when it is not import
ed BY the dispenser, or is not in his
hands, or 10 the hands Of some one with
;,is permission. Alcoholic liquors i'm
ported into this State and declared cou-
traband, aud go subject to seizure, just
as soon as they are seized and passed
into the hands Of the dispenser, lose
their injurious qualities, are put into
the channels of distribution and are sold
to the people of the State for their use
and consumption.
It is not necessary to 60 into min-
ute and detailed examination Of all the
provisions of the dispensary law, nor to
determine whether all these provisions
are. or are not in the exercise Of the
police power. 1t is sufficient for the
purpose Of this case to say that 10 SO far
as the dispensary Law for0ids citizen
to purchase in other States, and to ion.
port into this State alcoholic liquors for
bis own use aud consumption, the pro-
ducts of other States, i, discriminates
against the products of other States.
Such Discrimination cannot be made
under the guise Of the police power.
Walling Va Michigan, 1l6 U. s., 446.
cited and approved in Plubley VS..
Massachusetts. 155 U. S.. 571. Ern-
es, VS.. Missouri l56 U. S., 296. And
further 10 so far as this ac, permits the
chief dispenser to purchase in other
States alcoholic liquors and to import
them into this State for the purpose of
SelilUS tue.u, loI uoS ouu COuoUu pIlou,
at retail with the State, and forbids all
other persons from so purchasing and
importing for their individual use aud
consumption, it discrimiuates against
all other citizens Of the State. 1t also
makes discrimination against all per-
sons 10 the trade 10 other States who
are Dot patronized by the State disper-
ser. forbiddiog them to seek customer
within the State, and to enjoy com
mercial intercourse secured to others in
this State.
These conclusions rest on this dis
crimination If it did not exist, aud if
all alcoholic liquors we're excluded from
the State, or if all persons we're for
hidden to import alcoholic liquors, or
if the laws of South Carolina had de-
cared that all alcoholic liquors were
OF such poisonous and detrimental char
acter; aud that their use and cousump-
ton as a beverage were against the
morals, good health and safety of the
Ctoto othor oni diHarent nrestions