Windham County reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1901-1906, 1904-11-04
The Cider Clause.

on the license law announced last
week Just before We went to press
IL an interesting one. No certain
words or phrases are actually de-
c,ared null and void; the offending
clause providing for the exemption OF
farmers and manufacturers VINO sell
cider by the barrel and manufacturers
of native wines who sell for consump-
ton off the premises, from the re-
strictions of the law Is repugnant 10
the fourteenth amendment TO the
constitution of the United States
but the court holds that this clause
may not be stricken out entireiy
without giving an effect to the OPP
Grafton of the law that was not IN
tended-that is, the forbidding OF tne
sale Of cider and native wines by the
manufacturers thereof. Therefore
they hold that $50 much OF the ACT
as renders other persons liable TOT
selling cider by the barrel not TO De
drunk on the premises and for SELL
ing wines not to be drunk on the
premises is imperative anu ''
This decision has been variously
interpreted, but the meaning Is so
clear that there can be no doupt
of It. The application of the decis-
ion to the law was definitely stated
by the court Yet no less an author-
ity on state questions than the Bur-
,ington Free Press declared edl-
torially Saturday morning that Ihe
effect of the decision of the supreme
court is to make it illegal for farm
ers or others to sell fermented ciaer
without license" Not only does
the decision not have this effect, but
il increases the number or persons
who NAV sell cider without license.
Another interesting feature of this
decision is that practically the same
clause was embodied in the prohip-
itory law which was nominaliy en-
forced for fifty years and was at least
three separate times declared const-a
tutional; according to the present de-
cision of the court, re-enactment Oh
the old prohibitory law could not
constitutionallV exempt farmers ana
manufacturers Of wines ana cider
from it's provisions, could not dis
criminate in favor Of persons In
class as against others In the same
class-the class being those VINO WISH
IN sell cider by the barrel and native
wines not to be drunk on the prem
ises.
The force of the opinion read by
Judge Watson is derived from the
assumption that a class is created
which does not naturally eXist-a
class of farmers and others who man.
ufacture and sell cider and wines as
distinct from those who do not man
ufacture. The common opinion
would be that this class of manufac-
turers and sellers was natural ana
distinct class, and not merely part
of the larger class of all those VINO
SELL
remedy for this situation is not
readily apparent. 1t is suggested that
a nominal tax will be placed on
farmers and Others dealing in this
class of liquors. If this tax or license
fee is required only from farmers
and manufacturers it will as plainly
be legislation in their favor as the
original clause was. If any seller OF
cider by the barrel or wines not TO
he drunk on the premises is to be al
lowed a license at a nominal fee the
result will be scarcely better than II
the law were left absolutely alone
as the supreme court has interpreted
it. in declaring that all persons can
sell cider by the barrel and native
wines in any quantity not to be
drunk on the premises without pay
ing any license fee. Once the legisla-
ture gets tangled up in this problem
it will go hard with the law. Let the
farmers understand however that
their case in the event of return to
prohibition will be worse than it can
be under license.
Whatever action the Legislature
may take in this matter, it is deslr-
able and probable that they will en-
deavor to provide for the sale of cider
without license by farmers and
mamfa cturerS