The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1911-01-25
May KEEP ron PERSONAL USE
Supreme Court Rcrdcrs Importsn'
Decision an Liquor Case.

Columbia. Dan. 20.-Holding that 1t
10 not unlawful To have whtskey in
Possession for personal use, and de-
nning the powers OF the Act of 1909
with reference to the sale of whiskey
clearly. the Supreme Court today re-
versed the spartanburg County Courf.
In the ease 'of Elias Rookard. who was
convicted for violation OF the Act.
The oYdnion Is by Associate Justice
WOODS and 'construes clearly the ssev-
erai sscaions OF the Act, which have
never before been reviewed by the
Supreme Court.
. 4 TAf-tefendant was convicted in
QBparrunburg County In January OF
last year. on the charge of having
whfslsey In his possession and was
indicted under the section OF the Act
~ Rsas. which ends: ~And which II
drunk ITO excess viii produce antoxi-
cation. except as hereinafter provid-
va" No question as to the constitur
ttonndtfy OF the Act was raised I'm the
appaa. but the defendant coEtended
that the Circuit Judge erred In his
cenlbsuctton OF the statute. when he
charged the jury In efrect that the
stature makes the mere Keeping In
posss.aon liquor by pr'vate indi-
viduai a criminfi onense: snd that.
0nerGWs. the Jury shepld oony It n
<1ey xDhhd that the tlefsnG.n, had
hQa~ In his possession. eyen IL they
ohct1d nnd that he had not unlawful
" rpreived nor, accepted II and had
not hept Il m possession for an un-
s----.sSss use,
: rrssc decision of the Supreme Court
ssys that the question Is whather the
Circuit Judge was right In holding
the Act OF .sos. to prohibit and make
criminal the Keeping in possession OF
LIQUOR On this state under all eircum-
stsncea without regard to the man
ner OF acquiring possession or the
purpose for which the liquor was
acquired. 1T seems clear that the
statute cannot be 50 constructed" :"
says the opinion. Tho Court contin-
ueS; such a construction would
make the, Act itself destructive. for
other sections Of this Act. as we'll as
portions OF the dispensary statute OF
1907. recognized by this statute as
still I'm force. provide for the sale OF
LIQUOR by the county dispensaries.
and certainly a legal sale and pur-
chase carried the right to the purchas-
er to keep I'm his possession the liquor
he has purchased. provided his does
not apply TITO an unlawful use."
The Court continues that one may
lawfully keep in his possession liquar
purchased. for personal use under the
protection OF the Interstate COM
merce clause Of the Federal Constitu-
tion. ANY attempt" says the decis-
ION. by the General Assembly 10 ih-
terfere with this right would be futile
and the presumption is very strong
against the legislative intention to
make such an attempt. Indeed. the
right 10 keep I'm possession liquor so
purchased. is expressly recognized I'm
Section rs of the Dispensary Act OF
1907. which has not been repealed"
The Court says that II follows that
the provision OF the Act of 1909,
making II unlawful "to keep In pos
session I'm this State" Intoxicating
liquors except as hereinafter pro.
vided." means that II should be a
misdemeanor to keep In possession
hquor which had not been unlawful
ly obtained. that Is. obtained In a
manner not recognized as lawful by
that Act or the unrepealed provision
Of the Act OF 1907. or to keep In pos
session for sale or some other use
forbidden by the statute liquor law
fully obtained"
The conclusion Is reached that a
new trial should be ordered.