The county record. [volume] (Kingstree, S.C.) 1885-1975, 1897-04-15
CAN'T KEEP LIQUOR
IN YOUR HOUSE UNLESS IT is OFF,.
ciAl OR STAMPED.
Important Decision--Eesuls OF Divided
Court--Justice Mciver Calls Attention to
the United States Courts Decision.

By reason of al equally divided
court the State supreme court has rem
dered q decision TO the effect that q
man cannot keep two and half gal
Ions of whisKey in his house for his
own personal use, without the com
missioner's stamp upon 1t, without
laying himself liable to criminal pros
ecution under the dispensary Law.
The decision was rendered in the
case OF Anderson Chastian and the
judgmen. of the circuit court below
stands affirmed. Chief Justice Mc1ver
and Associate Justice Gary have filed
very strong opinions against sustain
ing the finding of the lower court
Mr.. Justice Jones files the opinion on
the other side, in which Associate
Justice Pope concurs. In the Flor
ence case recently decided, in which
the court was equally divided, the ap-
pellants have submitted request that
q rehearing be granted before all the
Judges sitting en- banc. No doubt a
similar request will be made In this
case. Chief Justice McIver, in his opin-
ion, thus presents the matter in sub
stance:
The defendant was found guilty and
sentenced to pay q fine of 800, or 60
on the chain gang for three months
for having in his possession two and q
half gallons of corn whiskey, which
had no State stamp on it. On this
judgment an appeal was taken to the
supreme court of the State.
The appeal was taken on the follow
ing grounds in brief
First. Because his honor erred In
charging the jury as follows: THE
question is did he have liquor there,
keeping it there without any stamps
on iti If so, he must show that either
he bought it through the regular
channels, the dispensary. or that he
obtained it from the State commits.
sioner the proper stamps to be put on
it" and should have charged the jury
instead that the keeping OF a small
quantity of liquor in his dwelling
house for his own use and not to be
bartered does not constitute a crime.
Second. That it is only the storing
or keeping In possession Of alcoholic
LIQUORS for some unlawful use or pur.
pose, which is made an indictable Of
Tense by statute aud his honor erred
in not so holding.
The chief justice states th 1T from the
testimony, the State constsbles found
in the dwelling house, while defend
ant was absent three gallon jug
containing about two gallons Of corn
whiskey, which they seized, because
there were no stamps upon 1t from the
State commissioner. There was no
testimony to show that the whiskey
was for sale or any other unlawful
purpose or that the defendant had
ever sold whiskey. On the contrary
the defendant stated that he had OBJ
tanned the whiskey about three weeks
previous for his own personal use and
for no other purpose, because he was
in bad health and needed it; that he
had never sold any whiskey and could
not tell how much of it he bad used
before il was seized. 1t was admitted
that the whiskey had not been bought
from q dispensary and it had no
sampson it. The charge OF the cir.
cult judge was as follows: 'The in
dictment is for storing and keeping in
possession alcoholic liquors. If man
undertakes to keep liquor he must
have the stamp Of the State commits
siouer. The question Is did he have
liquor there, keeping it without any
stamp, if so he must show that he
bought it from the dispensary or that
he obtained from the State commits
sioner the stamps to put on it. The
law prevents this storing Of liquors,
shows how it may be kept safely
without any trouble and If man Is
not minded to put himself to that
trouble, then he,,will have to look out
for the consequences.
The chief justice goes on to say that
the circuit judge proceeded upon the
theory that 1t is an indictsble effense
for q person to have in his possession
alcoholic liquors, even for his own
use, unless the required stamps are
upon it In the first place the indict'
ment does not charge any such oHense
for il does not charge that liquors
were found without the requisite
stamps. On the contrary the charge
is that the defendant unlswfully stor-
ed certain contraband liquor. In the
second place an examination OF the
dispensary law of 1896 fails to disclose
any provision making it an indlctable
offense for a person to have liquor IN
his possession without the stamps OF
the State on it. There are several pro
visions in that act making such liquor
liable to seizure and forfeiture, but
none declaring that the mere fact that
q person is found in possession OF al,
coholic liquors without stamps shall
constitute criminal offense.
The sections of the act, which 1t Is
conteDded sustain this prosecution are
the ist, the 25th, the 26th and 35th,
and these sections are considered IN
the opinion of the chief justice.
After quoting the first section he
says that it is divided into two dis
tinct parts; the first part makes 1t a
penal offense to do any of the acts
therein forbidden, while the second
part was intended to render the IL
nnors referred tn liable TO seizure