Clarke courier. [volume] (Berryville, Va.) 1869-1997, 1909-09-29
Byrd Law Upheld


The Supreme Court of Appeals
last week affirmed the constitution
atty of the Bryd liquor law. and
IN doing SO 10 reversed Judge r.
w. Harrison, of Winchester, i'm the
most noted case that has come up
form the lower courts in the many
assaults that have been made on
the liquor law passed by the last
general assembly.
Two liquor opinions were handed
down last week in which the same
principle was involved, and in
each instance the court below was
reversed and the decree entered
by the court of last resort which
ends the cases for good and all.
The Commonwealth had appeal
ed from the decision of the trial
courts, which held section OBJ
unconstitutional. and i'm each in
stance the Commonwealth is a
winner.
k. NJ. Henry, Il former liquor
dealer %: Winchester. was arrested
and fined 500 for selling near
beer"
1t was charged that he sold the
stuff by the bottle, whereas under
the law mo- person is allowed to sell
near beer or malt liquor. under
section 23t, except the manufac-
turer. Henry was not manufac-
turer and made no claim To being
the maker of the stuff he was
selling.
1t is also the law that no manu-
facturer of the near beer can sell
less than six nor more than four
dozen bottles to any one customer
at one and the same time. No re-
taller can handle near beer.
Henry was arrested and taken
before the police magistrate of the
city of Winchester and was fined
$500 Us stated above. He appealed
to the corporation court of that
city; before the case was heard in
that tribunal his counsel, r. T..
Barton and l.. O. Wendenburg,
sued out a writ of habeas corpus
before Judge Harrison, and the
case was heard by him.
Judge Harrison handed down a
lengthy opinion, in which he held
that section 2S4 of the Byrd law
was unconstitutional because it
it made unconstitutional prefer
enceS as To who might handle the
malt beverages and also because
the section was too vague To be
enforced.
The case was at once appealed
10y the State and was argued al
stanton by Marshall Mccormick
Il. L. Barton and l.. Q. Wenden-
burg, for Henry, and by Attorney
General Anderson and Senator
Ward for the State.
The case from Giles county,
which was also reversed. was that
of the Commonwealth against
Shannon. The man was fined fol
selling near-beer; and he sought
redress in the circuit court of his
county, the Judge in that case hold.
ing, rs did Judge Harrison, tina
the near-beer section was uncon
Stitutional, and the State appealed
to the Supreme Court, and TIN,
court decided that case on precisely
the same grounds that were helC
in the case of Henry.
The case of Henry had beer
pending in the courts nearly
year, the warrant for the arrest q
the offender having been issued il
! November last, and since that tim
the case has been going from on
court to another with good dea
of speed.
The Byrd liquor law has bee
attacked in many cities and town
, and in every ease that has gone +
: the Supreme Court of Appeals IN
law has been sustained as it appear
on the books. and the Judges @
that tribunal have not had the leas
trouble III constituting it in accor
with the views Of the author c
the measure. Richmond New.
: Leader.
III. r. =. 4