Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1911-01-24
LIQUOR IN DRY COUNTIES.
Supreme Court Says That Private
Ownership Is Not Unlawful.


Holding that it is not unlawful to
have whisky in possession for personal
use, and defining the powers Of the
act Of 1909 with reference to the sale
on last Friday reversed the Spartan
burg county court in the case of Elias
Rookard, who was convicted for vio-
lation of the act. The opinion Is by
strues clearly the several sections Of
, the act which have never before been
reviewed by the supreme court. The
defendant was convicted in Spartan
burg county in January Of last year
on the charge Of having whisky in
his possession and was indicted un-
der the section Of the act Of 1909
which ends land which II drunk to
excess will produce intoxication ex-
cept as hereinafter provided"
No question as to the constitutional
ity of the act was raised in the appeal
but the defendant contended that the
circuit Judge erred in his construction
Of the statute where he charged the
jury in effect that the statute makes
the mere keeping in possession OF
liquor by private individual GRIM
inal offense, and that therefore the
jury should convict II they found
that the defendant had liquor in his
possession even IL they should find
that he had not unlawfully received
nor accepted 1t and had not kept 1t
in possession for an unlawful use.
The decision of the supreme court
says that the question Is whether
the circuit judge was right in holding
the act of 1909 to prohibit and make
criminal the keeping in possession Of
liquor in this state under all circum-
stances without regard to the man.
ner Of acquiring possession or the
purpose for which the liquor is kept
1T seems clear that the statute can
not be so construed" says the opin-
ion. The court continues "such a
construction would make the act tt
self destructive for other sections Of
this act as we'll as portions Of the
dispensary statute of 1907 recognized
by this statute as still in force, pro-
vide for the sale of liquor by the
county dispensaries; and certainly a
legal sale and purchase carried the
right to the purchaser to keep in his
possession the liquor he has pur-
chased, provided he does not apply
it to an unlawful USE"
The court continues that one may
lawfully keep in his possession liquor
purchased for personal use under the
protection Of the interstate commerce
clause of the Federal constitution.
ANY attempt" says the decision,
by the general assembly to inter-
fere with this. right would be futile
and the presumption is very strong
against the legislative intention to
make such an attempt. Indeed the
right to keep in possession liquor so
purchased Is expressly recognized in
section % of the dispensary act Of
1907 which has not been repealed"
The court says that 1t follows that
the provision Of the act Of 1909 max
ing 1t unlawful ito keep in possession
in this state" intoxicating liquors,
except as hereinafter provided"
means that 1t should be a misdea-
meanor to keep in possession liquor
which had not been unlawfully OBJ
tanned that is obtained in manner
not recognized as lawful by that act
or the repealed provision Of the act
Of 1907 or to keep in possession for
sale or some other use forbidden by
the statute liquor lawfully obtained"
The conclusion Is reached that a
new trial should be ordered.