The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1897-01-27
DISpENSARY CASE DECIDED.
The Federal Supreme Court Sustains
Judge Simonton.


Judge Simonton.
WASHINGTON, D. c., Jan. IS. Sena-
tor Tillman's hobby, (the South Caro-
lima dispensary liquor law, } was ditched
to-day by the Supreme Court Of the
United States. The Court decided
that the law is unconstitutional so far
as it seeks to prohibit citizens of the
State from importing into the Com
monwealth liquor for personal use.
The question whether the State has
the right to engage in the liquor traffic
was not raised during the trial, hence
the constitutionality Of the entire dis
pensary law was not passed upon'Dy
the Court.
The general opinion of South Caro-
linians and lawyers who have followed
this interesting case is that to-day's
decision practically destroys the ia
nous liquor law, which enabled Sena
tor Tillman to rise from the Governors
chair to the United States Senate.
Ever since the Chicago Convention
Tillman' influence in South Carolina
has been on the down-grade, and his
political enemies claim that the de-
cision of the Supreme Court to-day
will expedite his journey into political
obscurity. One of the interesting in
cidcnts of the day was the wide differ
ence Of opinion between the two South
Carolina Senators on this subject.
Irby claims to have made Tillman,
but recently they quarrelled and Till
man undertook to displace Irby,in the
Senate with Ex. Governor John Gary
Evans. Irby joined forces with the
Anti -Tillman faction in the State and
helped to defeat Evans with Judge
Earle.
To-day Tillman and Irby met in the
Senate chamber for the first time this
session. Tillman advanced towards
his colleague and extended his hand.
The handshake thai followed was
about as cordial as Cvrbett and Fitz-
simmons will put up if they ever meet
at the ring side. A few perfunctory
words were exchanged and the hated
rivals parted. A few minutes later
the news reached the Senate that the
South Carolina liquor case had been
decided against the State. Here is
how the South Carolina Senators ex-
pressed themselves on the subject:
Senator Tillman said he was the
"daddy Of the dispensary child, and
therefore he was anxious to ascertain
to what extent the Supreme Court had
mutilated his offspring" There was
considerable confusion over the de-
cision of the Court owing to the fact
that Chief Justice Fuller announced
the decree Of the Court for Mr.. Justice
Shiras, who was absent from the Bench
to-day. The decision was quite long,
and the Chief Justice made but a
brief statement Of the findings of the
Court. His condensation was such
that it was difficult to determine
whether the Court had passed upon
the entire Dispensary Act, or simply
that part of it which enables parties
to bring liquor into the State for their
personal use. After spending several
hours in trying to get at the real scope
Of the decision Senator Tillman was
informed by Mr.. Justice Brown, who
dissented from the opinion of the Court,
that the decision simply afirms the de-
cree of the lower Court, which decided
that it was unconstitutional for the
State authorities to arrest persons for
bringing liquor into the State for per-
sonal use. With that understanding Of
the decision senator Tillman exclaimed:
"That decision does not kill my dis
pensary law by jug full. As un-
derstand it the decision simply ahirms
the decision of Judge Simonton, who
more than a year ago issued an in
junction which prevented the State
officers from arresting and seizing
liquor brought into the State for the
personal use of the parties interested.
1t does not go into the general question
of the constitutional right of the State
to traffic in liquor. We have been
operating under the injunction of
Judge Simonton for more than year,
and the decision rendered to-day does
not materially affect the existence Of
the law. We will go right ahead and
enforce the law SO as not to conflict
with the Supreme Court, but il we
find that the law is not broad enough
I will undertake to get a special Act
of Congress passed to give us all the
power we desire to enforce the law.
The fight is not over by jug full, and
we will continue to defend the dis
pcnsary law because we telieve it is
for the good of the people of the
State"
"Will not the decision rendered to-
day enable or encourage people to
evade the law and make combinations
to get liquor into the State under the
prctext that it is for their personal
use p
eff they do we will capture their
stuff just as we are doing to-day. If
any further legislation is necessary,
our Legislature is in session, and we
will amend the law to meet any emer-
gency that may arise. There is
mistaken idea prevailing in the minds
of certain people that the dispensary
law was enacted to give the State
revenue. That was not the intention
of the trainers Of the law. We want
to break up the bar room system and
curtail the consumption of liquors in
the State. We don't care anything
about the revenue we get from it if we
can prevent drunkenness and check
the influence of the rum sellers in
State politics. A great deal has been
said about the dispensary law being
used to promote the political ambition
of certain men in the State. These
charges arc without foundation, and it
will not do for the enemies of the law
to keep up that old cry.
Senator Irby said that he was un-
able to see the text of the decision,
but the impression given him by those
who listened to its reading by Chief
T,ct;oo Er11or uoo tb.t tho Gourf do