The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1898-05-10
cARoLINA'S DISPENSARY LAW.
NEW STATUTE PASSED UPON by
SUPREME COURT.

Denial of the Right of Interstate
Commerce, and Therefore Antag-
onistic to the Constitution of the
United States-COurf Holds, How
ever, That the Portion Of the Law
Regulating the sale of Original
Packages Within the state Is VAL
id.
Washington, May 9,-The supreme Court
to-day handed down its decision in the
case of Vance. Bahr. ct al. against the
W. A. Vandercook Company, appealed
from the Circuit Court of South Carolina,
and the effect Of that decision is that the
validity of. the dispensary law in its vital
parts is sustained.
The decision places the South Carolina
law clearly within the police powers Of the
state.
The right Of the state to forbid the sale
of liquors in the original packages the
court holds to be clear. and it regards the
dispensary law as merely voicing chat
right.
The opinion of the court was delivered
10y Justice White. 1t aftirms a part of the
decision of the court below and reverses
part.
Chief Justice Fuller and Justices shiras
and McKenna dissent as TO the portion of
the opinion reversing any part of the opn-
ION of the court below They took the
position that the law in its entirety is in
violation of the constitution, and that the
opinion antagonists to il should be sus-
,F . a
court agreed with Justice White
Justice White, in his opinion, reviews
at some length the decision of the court IN
the case of Scott against Donald. and ex
plains that in neither case was the ques-
ton raised whether the state could with
Out violating the constitution, confer upon
certain officers and agents the sole power
to buy all liquors which were 10 be sold
in the state, and allowing no other liquor
to be sold. He explained that the present
law, while similar in general scope to that
passed upon in the former decisions was
different in many particulars the clauses
which had been found under those former
decisions to operate as discriminating
against citizens Of other states having
been eliminated.
Justice White set out the three grounds
upon which the constitutionality of the
law is denied by the decision of Judge
Smonton, and pointed out that two of
these go TO the very root of the law itself,
while the third is narrower in its purport
only DISABLING as unconstitutional the par
ticuIar restrictions which the state puts
upon the rights of persons of another stale
to ship TO South Carolina and of residents
of that state to receive liquor for their own
use.
Upon this latter feature of the case
Judge Simonton is upheld. The court is
unanimous in affirming his decision.
But on the other two points, which go
al the very root of the law, Judge Simon
ton is reversed and the law Is upheld.
The language of Justice White. in sum-
ming up the courts decision, is this: 1T
follows from the foregoing that the de-
cree below rendered was well-founded, in
so far as it restrained the defendants
from seizing the property shipped into The
state of South Carolina from the state OF
California by the complainant for resi-.
dents of the state of South Carolina on
the orders Of such residents for their own
use, because said shipments had not been
made in compliance with the regulations
of the law of South Carolina.
But it further follows that the decree
below was wrong, in so far as it restrani-
ed the state officers from levying upon
the property of the complainant for the
purpose of being stored therein original
packages and from interfering with sucn
sales
These conclusions require that the
Judgment below be affirmed in part ana
reversed in part. This renders il 1eces-
sary to remand the case to the court be-
low with instructions to enter a decree
setting aside the injunction and dismiss
he fp ~
and perpetuating the injunction only in SO
far as is above pointed out the whole In
accordance with the views herein above
expressed. And ii is so ordered"
The effect of this decision is that the
inspection provision of the law is tanta
mount to denial of the right of interstate
commerce and, therefore, antagonistic 10
the constitution of The United States;
while in all the essential respects the
law is held to be valid.
The decision of the court was widely
here.
senator Tillman in discussing 1t. said:
IT seems to me the dispensary law ia
decidedly ON top. With this decision the
mere question of suppressing blind tigers
VIII not be very difficult. The only nodi-
hcaton made necessary by this decision
IS as to the requirement for the ANALYSIS
ana inspection of liquor imported for use
II VIII not be very difficult TO meet this
oeheVe this decision of the court means
mat the question is settled for all time
so Tar as the United States is concerned
and the dispensary system will be left
alone to work out its own destiny. All
that Gov Ellerbee viii have TO do IS to
reorsanize the constabulary, and. if neces-
sary, use the metropolitan police and en-
force the law. In other words, suppress
the Illicit sales. l think the Governor
could well afford TO declare an amnesty
and facilitate the expectation of all IL
quors now held by the original package
people with the understanding that after
certain day the law win be enforced with
all vigor. In other words, now that the
law is declared constitutional il might be
well TO take a new start with those who
have gone into the Illicit sale with the
idea that the law was unconstitutional. -
Commenting upon the political effect
Senator Tillman eaid he believed the de-
cision would strengthen the Governor. as
Wen as the reform movement very rnucn.
Senator McLauren said: This decision
takes the matter out of the courts ana
leaves its settlement to the people. IL
means that the dispensary law is a fix
ture and viii never be changed unless