The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1908-09-23
LIQUOR tiW UHlsslllBlE.
HIGHEST COURT IN THE LAND
UPHELD OLD DIsPENsARY


Decssson In FIeischmann Case That
south Csroiina Has No Right 10
Engage In whiskey Trsasc at va
reancc wieh United States suprcmc
Cc~rt Decision In vandcrcook vs..
\ vancc Case.
columbia. Sept f7.-On account Of
certain intimations in the decision
OF the Court OF Appeals In the case
ot vleischmann against the dispensary
compission. concerning the State
d'sptnsary syster,. Il has been sug-
: \essssd that the Courts might declare
The county dispensary system uncon-
ssitutional. but IN examination OF the
dccislon and Of former decisions does
not support that idea.
So far ss the coustitutionality Of
the county dispensary system is con-
Geerned II IL undoubtedly on the same
= Footing ss the old state dispensary
system- II 10 provided In tho consti-
tuition OF the state that liquor shall
~ sold In this State only by the State
or by parties licensed by the Legis-
iature. and no such thing as "coun-
Z " dispensary Is In reality possible.
! 1Thsrefore In establishing system to
be conducted by the counties II was
necessary 90 declare that the business
should be conducted In the name OF
the State. and that provision Is In the
county dispensary law.
hut the Supreme Court OF the Unit
"a States has passed squarely on the
cohstitutionality Of the State dispen-
sary systcm. and In the celebrated
case Of vandsrcook vs.. Vance, the
~original package" case. the Federal
supreme Court held that In its sxer-
,c,ss Of the police power the state Of
z1oouth Carolina has the right 70 mo.
nopoltss the sale OF whiskey.
a year or more ESQ Mr. q. Duncan
rsliinssr. formerly Attorney General.
vss called On 20 settle . dispute. be-
tween two gentlemen Of this city In
\eeoArd 90 the effect Of the decision OF
0As Supreme Court In the vandsrcook
casa. and HE conclusions ara perhaps
ths most suecinct and exact statement
az ths eass IN record. Mr.. Bell,nssr
vos entirely familiar with the DIS
peosary law and ~ history. having
besa Attorney General whom the law
49, In litisation. and HE flndings In
d. CO.. win b Of particular Interest
/ ~ st this time.
Afssr rsviswins the decision and
eueelns portsoas Of II ne said:
''16y eonclusions are:
"(s) That the Court considered that
ne complainant. In order to obtain the
trayvr Of his bill. made three contsn-
lions: arvt. that thsre were provisions
IN the dispsnsary Act which. on their
face. amount TO discrimination. and
therefore render the Act void;' sec.
ond. that II was O violation OF the
= Consultation Of the United States to
eoufsr upon state oncers tho power
20 buy all liquors which are sold In
the state and forbid the sale. even In
'orisinai packages by any other per.
son: third. that particular restrictions
IN the Act imposed. as TO importation
Of liquors for personal use. are uncon-
y stitutional This last IL too marrow
I'm IL purpose to affect more than tho
particular restrictions but the court
declares that the FIRST two \contentions
10 to the whole statute. and. thsre-
fore. II well taken. render It void as
, IN entirety
"(b) The Court decides that II II IL
Unconstitutional to forbid the sale
by private parties. OF liquors In the
original packages II can only be be-
cause the Act regulating the sale Of
liquor generally Is unconstitutional
inasmuch as by the Act Of Congress.
; 1880. the restrictions and regulations
OF state laws become operative on
tae original package before the sale
thereof. and therefore such packages
cannot be sold II che state law forb,ds
the sale. Ut can be only so sold In the
manner and form prescribed by the
State regulations
"(c) The Court argues and con-
ciudes II Is not unconstitutional TO
prevent the sale In original packages
by other than state officers. because
such prevention Is the effect Of the
Inhibition OF the Act. which itself is
but the execution Of a power lawfully
vested In the Legislature Of the state.
(p. +A7)
"td While the Court declared the
particular restrlctionS void. as re-
strictins the free Importation Of H.
auors for personal use II decides that