Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1903-11-12
THE CIDER CLAUSE
Lawyer Contends That This In
validates the Whole High
License Law.
BEFCRE SUPREME COURT
Arguments Made Yesterday I'm Orange
County Cases-Clnimcd Cider Clause
IL Class LegisIation-Thc CnIe-
donia County Test Case VIII
BE Argued To-day.

Montpelier. Nov. 1l.-Thc constitution
alty d the high licensc-loCal option law
now il force was before the Supreme
court to-day in an interesting case from
Orange county, State vs.. Alvin T. Hazel
ton IL, state claims that last May, Haz-
elton, who runs a bakery in Bradford,
give o5c Barrett the money with which
to procure pint Of whiskev for him at
the ban Of Hotel Low in Bradford. IIaz-
elton waited in Barrott's entry while the
latter proceeded on lis errand of mercy,
and 'n iarrctts return lIAzclton permit
ted hnt To take a drink from the bottle.
which Has then passed TO IGazclton i'll the
entry
liazelton and Barrett were each prose
cutcd for furnishing. At the last June term
of Ouuge county court Ilazolton de-
murred to the indictment against him
claiming that section II of the license law
Is un'OnSt ititlOnal. JuGge Munson over
ruled the demurrer, pro forma, and the
respondent excepted.
The respondents claim is that the ex-
enlptiol of sales of cider by the barrel by
farmcrs is unconstitutional in that it Is
class leeislation and that the exemption
Of udtNc wines and cider violates the
commerce clause Of the federal constitu-
tion. - thc law was voted on as an en-
tiretY and owes its present force to the
fact that a majority of only 40 out of Il
total vote of ~ i@} 50 voted. 1t was argued
that ;hese exemptions. particularly the
one relating tu cider. formed ~ sufficient
inducament TO secure the majority and
that f these parts are invalid the Who'll:
act must fall. John T. Pickett Of Brad
ford ana Halo *. Darling of Chelsea who
have put in n great deal of time in pre-
pairing this case argued it for the respOn-
dent. States Attorney u. :. Conant of
bradford was assisted by NJ. NJ. Wilson
Of Raldolph
Extracts from the respondents brief
follow:
This statute must he regarded
measure of regulating. rather than for
taxing. the traffic. 1t is enacted by virtue
of the police power, and is strictly sub
ject 10 the limitations of that power.
Although the police power is broad and
extensive. we submit that any police
regulation. and especially one of this
character. must satisfy all the conditions
OF this test: The court must be able to
see not only that the enactment has for
It's object the prevention of some otfense
or manifest evil. or the preservation of
the public health. safety. morals or gem
crl welfare hut that there is some
"clcar, real and substantial connection
between tho assumed purpose of the en-
actment and the actual provisions there
Of AMI that the latter do in some plain,
arpreoiable and appropriate manner tend
toVar5 the accomplishment of the object
for which the power is exercised.
In determining whether the features of
license law are within the police power,
il should be borne in mind that there
is more particular or restricted sense
in which the term is almost always used
when II enters into the discussion Of
Constitutional questions, and especially
in connection with our present subject.
And in this meaning its scope is limited
10, sfg.,e
three elements IN the general welfare
Viz. the public safety, the public health
and the public morals.
While it is for the legislature to de
tcrmue tine occasion for the exercise Of
the police power. it is for the courts to
determine, what are the proper subjects
upon winch it may be exercised and
whether the regulations are reasonable
impartial and consistent.
SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS.
(sJ The exemption from the prohibi-
tion Of Sec. Il. Of sales by the barrel by
farmers who raise sufficient apples to
make tho cider which they sell" is un-
constitutional 1t is in conflict with that
portion Of the ltth amendment of the
United States constitutions which de-
clarcs that 30 state shall make or enforce
any law which shall abrldee the PRIV
iloges or immunities of citizens of the
United States, and guarantees equal pro-
lection OF the law, and also with article l.,
chap /, Cunst of Vermont, which de-
clates that government is or ought TO
he for the common benefit, protection and
security of the people, nation or com
munity, and not for the particular emolu-
mont OF advantage Of any single man.
family or set of men. who are part only
Of that community" In other words, it
s class legislation of the character which
this court has recently held unconstitu-
Nunal.
We submit the following, as pertinent
inquiries:
can the LEGISLATURE make the lawful
ness OF an act dependent upon the mere
fact Of mans occupation, no qualihca-
lions or regulations being prescribed as
essential to tho exercise OF that occupa-
ton.
What Just and true relation is there
between the object sought to be accomp-
lished by this law and the exemption of
this favored class
Why should this privilege and this I'M
munty he bestowed upon farmers who
raise apples and denied to all others who
raise apples?
Is there any apt and reasonable con-
ueCtion between farming ana fitness for
the prudent handling OF commodity so
dangerous that traffic therein must he
regulated?
We do not deny that distinctions may
be made, when the same are proper and
reasonably necessary to efectuate the
object of the statute, hut We insist that
this discrimination cannot be justified.
II may he argued that the word farm
er" should he broadly constituted, and
that amy person who raises enough ap-
pies to make barrel OF cider Is far
mor to that extent. But apples tand par
ticularly cider apples) are fructus nat
urales and are not regarded as the re-
suit of husbdndry,
We protest against the theory that a
State can deprive a citizen of the right
to invoke the lith amendment, by en-
acting something and calling It police
regulation II this can be done, the amend
ment is worthless.
(b) The following parts of Sec. p are
unconstitutional as they create dis
elimination against the products of other
states and thus violate the commerce
clause OF the United states constitution:
but the provisions OF this net shall
not apply to sales by the barrel by the
manufacturers thereof of cider manufac-
tred in this State. Nor
SHAH the provisions of this act apply to
'he sales 10y the makers thereof OF native
vines manufactured in this state
The principle IL thus stated In Black on