The Guthrie daily leader. [volume] (Guthrie, Okla.) 1893-1996, 1909-04-22
FLAW N B|[[BPs LAW
Full Text of Criminal Court of Appeals
Decision Reversing Ellsworth Case.

under the authority OF The United
States. shall be the supreme law Of
The land; and the judges IN every
state shall Be bound thereby. any.
thing m the constitution or laws Of
any state TO the contrary Dotwilh.
standinK.
The Constitution 0f the United
States declares that Congress shall
have power 'tc regulate commerce
with foreign nations, and among tae
several states, and with the indian
Tribes TO regulate means 10 con
troll. SO. Il IL seen that the power
OF regulating or controlling commence
between the states Is vested excin.
siyely Ia Congress and that no state
has the power 10 pass any NV upon
this subject or which would In any
manner Interfere with or abridgo the
right OF one Of its citizens 10 pur-
chase In another state any artlcle Of
commerce which could be lawfully
sold IN the state where the purchase
10 made. and bring At 10 ids hons
IN his own state for his personal use.
This has been decided SO often that
no person who Is well informed upon
this subject viii question ihe rule
above stated. This matter aus been
passed zp0n by the Supreme Court
Of oklahoma IN achewedes v. State.
80 pac. 604; and by the Criminal
Court OF Appeals In the cases OF Hous
ton Hudson v. The States Webb High
". The Slate; and Josh McC0rd v.
The State. Neither OF the three lat.
ter declaioHs have yet been publish
ed. The cases above referred ID con.
tain such q thorough discussion OF
this matter, and quote from such an
overwhelming weight III authorities
that Il Is not necessary to repeat what
will be found IN them. II We are Ln
error toHehihg this matter Ii viii ho
an ea4y thing for The enforcement OF.
iicers Of this state 10 make q tes.
case 10 o eva proceeding and carry
" to the Supreme court Of the Unit.
ed statSs for final determination. il
that tribunal Gees 1T to reverse It's
iprfner decisions We viii be bound by
such action. and eheerfully follow II.
But, until this IL done. We fell con.
ptrained to adhere to the decisions
'ns they stand now.
II the decisions Of the Supreme
Court OF the United States are wrong.
application should and can be made
to that Court for ! reversal Of these
decisions. Il Is = waste OF time.
money. and labor to appeal 10 this
Court to set aside anything which
that court has decided. The Supreme
Court Of the United States, OF ne
cesslty, must Be the nnal Judge Of
the construction of the United States
Constitution. Otherwise we would
have q h~ydroheadad judicial system
IN which f~ortyseYen independent ap
peiIate coarlH could congtrue this N
strument 90 they pleased, which
would result not only ii confusion.
but in civil war. Each tribunal would
be supported By the military force
Of the government which It represent.
ed. This would result Ia aeath and
destruction ~ ID form Of govern.
ment. Certainly no reasonable per.
son desires this Court 10 adopt E Dol.
Icy which would bring about such
EerIouo consequences aR this. Il would
be treason itaelt One thing can be-
depended upon, aud that is. thai thia
Court win not make any such insane
attempt. Under the Constitution az
The United States. and the decisions
OF the Supreme Court 81 the United
States, Il Is clear that any resident
OF Oklahoma can purchase intQxlesi.
Ing liquors n anotaes state. ana ship
them into this state, aud 10 n0lnt OF
destination for hts own personal use
aud that such shipments constitute
Interstate commerce and that amy
state law 70 the contrary Is vnld. nut,
these shipments lose their character d
Interstate commerce as soon es .hey
feaeh the pdlnt Of their destination
md any further shipment a. such Ia.
uors Is subject to steio control.
The exact language OF tho Supreme
Court Of the United States IS aa fol-
lows.
Equally established Is The promo
elGlon that the right 10 send liquors.
from enc state into smother and the
act 81 sending the same. Is Interstate
commerce. the regulation whereof
has been committed hy the C0nstisu
tlon Of the United States 10 Congress.
aud hence. that a State law which
denies such n right. or substantially
lmterferea q hampera the same, il in
conflict with the Constitution 81 the
United States
but the right Of perness IN one
state 10 ship liquor into aie2scr state
10 bis residence for his own use ~
derived from the Constitution Of the.
United States, nnd does moi rest 81,
the state Law. nlther the conditions
ATTACHED hy the state law rnlawfnlly
RESTRAIN the right or they 40 not. II
they dc.-lhen they are void.
And, again the Court speaking al
the right Of every citizen ~ 4 state
70 purchase and have shipped % aim
liquors for his y use. says:
but The right arises from the Con,
stluutlon Of the United States It exs
lists wholly independent Of the will OF
either the lawmaklng uf executive
power of the state n takes IL orI.
gin out Of the Slate ~ South Carolina
and finds IT, support n the C0nstlln.
lion OF the United States whether
BE- not u can be exercised depends sole
y upon The viii Of the person max.
lnk the shipment and cannot b. IN