The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1896-10-22
CAROLINA'S DISPENSARY LAW.
THE CASE BEFORE THE SUPREME
COURT UNDER ARGUMENT.


The Matter Carried There by COnsta-
bIes Fighting an Injunction
Granted Against Them by the
United states Circuit COurt-AttOr-
ney General Barber Appears on
Behalf of the State and Wants the
Act of March O Last considered
by the Court in Reaching Its De-
cisiOn.
Washington, Oct 2l-Somewhat uneX-
pectedly to the officers of the court and to
the attorneys engaged, the argument upon
what are known as the South Carolina dis
pensary law cases, was begun in the SUI
preme court of the United States to-day:
In the enforcement OF the law the state
officials came into conflict with federal Of
fcers which resulted in bringing the law
to the attention of the supreme court upon
some collateral questions, but the cases al
bar, the validity of the law, as far as it
relates to the seizure Of liquors imported
into the state by private citizens for their
own consumption, is at stake. Liquors so
imported had been seized by the consta-
bles appointed to enforce the dispensary
law, and James Donald, a citizen, brought
suit against four of the constables for an
injunction to restrain them from Selling in
the future, any ales, wines, or liquors i'm
ported into the state himself for his per-
sonal use and consumption. The case was
filed in the United States circuit court and
after a hearing the court granted the in
junction asked for From that decree the
constables appealed to the supreme court
of the United States.
Attorney General w. A. Barber appear
ed on behalf of the constables in support
Of the law. In connection with the papers
in the case, he submitted to the court a
suggestion that an act passed March 6,
last, by the legislature of South Carolina
supersedes and repeats part of the origi-
nal dispensary law, and he moved that
the said act be considered by the court in
the determination of the appeal in this
case"
J. X. P. Bryan appeared for Donald
The court adjourned before he had con-
cluded his argument.
Mr.. Barber contended that the suit in
stituted by Donald was in effect against
the state; that the federal court had no
jurisdiction of the case, presenting no
question arising under the laws or consti-
tuition of the United States; and that the
law, in so far as it prohibits persons from
importing alcoholic liquors into the state
for personal use and consumption, is in
the lawful exercise of the police power of
the state and is not in conflict with the
constitution and interstate commerce laws
of the United States.
Replying to the argument Of Attorney
General Barber, j. p. K. Bryan, counsel
for Donald. contended that so much CT
the dispensary law as forbids a citizen of
South Carolina to purchase in other
states, and to import into that state al
coholic liquors for his own use and con-
sumption, the products of other states,
discriminates against the products and
citizens of other states, and also against
the citizens of that state, and is to that
extent null and void, being in violation
of the constitution and the interstate
commerce law. He denied that the law
was in any sense an inspection law, and,
therefore, legitimate exercise of the po-
lice power.
He spoke of the magnitude and far
reaching consequences of the principles
here at stake. A new political theory was
involved, as stated by Gov. Tillman in his
message of 1898, which he summarized in
these words: ut is not difficult to locate
the school of political thought that an
nounces as new principle in our form
of government that the state should sup
Ply NildI tllG pGOPle WANT. IL
the state could supply what the
people want in the liquor
trade" said Mr.. Bryan, cit could in
every trade in which the exercise of the
police power in the state could make reg-u-
lations, and thus practically the whole
business, trade and commerce of the state
could be constitutionally turned into a sys-
TEN of official conduct of business, with
an army of officers and state agents; and
thus instead of the individual citizens con-
Quoting trade with private capital and pri-
Vate enterprise under the protection and
restraints and regulations of the govern
ment, the state would be conducting trade
with public funds through official employ
es To state this result is to demonstrate
the falsity of the principle, for this result
is simply socialism and paternalism and
communism and destroys the very pur-
poses and transgresses all the bounds of
civil government in the history of the An
glo-Saxon race, and as contemplated by
the founders of these American common
wealths."