The county record. [volume] (Kingstree, S.C.) 1885-1975, 1900-11-29
CIGARETTE bEClSlON.
Supreme Court of United States Sus,
tains Tennessee Law.

tains Tennessee Law.
Washington, D. c., Speclal.-Tht
United States supreme court has rem
dered an opinion in the case Of VIM. B.
Austen VS.. the State Of Tennessee, in
volving> the question as to the recogni-
ton to which cigarettes are entitled
under the law. The case originated in
the State of Tennessee, and it called
into question the validity Of the State
law regulating the sale Of this article
of commerce, on the ground that it was
an infringement Of the right Of Con-
gress to regulate interstate commerce.
The Tennessee supreme court upheld
the law and the decision sustained
that verdict, though not without di:ap.
proval of some Of the positions taken.
and then upon very narrow margin,
four out Of nine members joining in
dissenting opinion and another member
of the court Justice White) placing
his assent upon grounds different from
those announced by Justice Brown,
who handed down the opinion. The
case grew out of the importation OF
cigarettes into Tennessee from North
Carolina. They were taken into the
State in ordinary sized cigarette pack
ages, about two by four inches, and
these packages were loosely thrown
into baskets which were uncovered.
The claim was. made that these cigar
cite packages were what is known to
the law as original packages. but with.
out clearly defining an original pack
age, the court held that it was clear.
that such packages could not be 80 re-
garded. Justice Brown, in passing up.
on the case, said that the packages
were obviously made up with view OF
evading the law, and as he spoke he
held one Of the little cigarette cases up
to the view of his auditors. On thi:
point the decision of the State court
to the effect that the packages were
not original, was fully confirmed.
On another phase OF the case, the
State court was not so fully endorsed
The Tennessee court had held that ci.
garettos are not an article OF commerce
With this view Justice Brown took is.
sue, and he delivered quite a disserta.
ton upon the subject. Whatever is an
object of barter and sale Is, he said, az
article OF commerce, and must be SO
recognized. Tobacco had been such an
article for 400 years. 1t had been the
snbject of taxation and indeed had be.
come more widely scattered than any
other vegetable. Probably, he added,
no other vegetable has contributed SO
much to the comfort and solace to the
human race. This being the case it was
entirely beyond bounds to say that to-
bacco was not an article y commerce
He then took notice of the claim that
cigarettes are an especially harmfu.
form of tobacco, and while he conceded
that this might be the case, he remark
e. that this claim was Of comparatively
recent origin. Still he held that cigar.
cites are as much subject OF State
regulation as Is liquor, and he further
held that while no State law could pro.
hibit importation In original packages
it was entirely competent for legisla-
ture to regulate the sale, because OF tht
original belief In the deleterious effec'
OF the article. There was a dissenting
opinion of Justice Shiras, in which the
Chief Justice and Justices Brewer ard
Peckham joined. They based their dis.
sent upon the theory that Congress has
exclusive control Of interstate com
merse.