The Lancaster news. [volume] (Lancaster, S.C.) 1905-current, 1913-05-16
CAN SHIP LIQUOR
FOR PERSONAL USE
Supreme Court Defines the Webb
Law-Enjoins Express Company
For Refusing to Make Deliveries
in South Carolina.

Law-EnjOins Express Company
For Refusing to Make Deliveries
in South Carolina.
The following was taken from
Thursdays Columbia State:
That there Is no statute in the
state Of South Carolina prohibiting
the importation of whiskey from
another state for personal use and
that the Webb act gives the state
the right to enact such a statute, IL
1t so desires. is the decision Of the
supreme court in deciding a case
testing the constitutionality of the
Webb act, which was passed by Con-
gress, Withdrawing the protection
OF interstate commerce from whis-
key shipments from one state to an
other. The supreme court held that
the old dispensary act forbidding
the ordering of whiskey for person
al use from other states, having been
declared unconstitutional, before the
passage OF the Webb act, could not
be vitalized by the passage of the
Webb act.
INTENTION OF ACT.
at is not the intention Of the
Webb act to interfere with the pol
Icy OF the state in regard to the i'm
portation Of liquor but merely to
provide that the enforcement of a
state statute would not be inter
fered with or hmapered by the in
terstate commerce laws" says the
decision.
"In other words, the act in this
respect is passive" continues the
decision, while it is incumbent on
the state to enact legislation of an
active nature If they are desirous
nrnhihifino q he sr,ar& ~,-f, %
liquors for personal use or other
purposes. But even If Congress had
undertaken to give validity to an un-
constitutional state statute it would
have been beyond its powers.
POWER OF LEGISLATURE.
While the legislature can not
pass an act, validating the provis-
ions OF the dispensary statute which
we have declared to be unconstitu-
tional, SO as to give it a retroactive
eject, 1t, nevertheless, has the
power to adopt a statute with similar
provisions having prospective ef-
feet, prohibiting alcoholic liquors
from being imported into this state.
such statute would not contra
vene any provision of the United
States constitution. AS we have al
ready said, the recent act of Con-
gress divests Intoxicating liquors of
their interstate commerce character
and invests the respective states
with power either to prohibit the
importation absolutely or allow it
only for sale and use through a dis
pensary. The classification of the
counties, SO as to allow the sale of
liquor in some of them while it is
not prohibited in others, would not
be violative of section / of the
18th amendment to the constitution
OF the. United States which provides
that no state shall deny to any per-
son within its jurisdiction the full
protection of hit claws"
CASE FROM RICHLAND.
The case arose in Richland coun-
ty through w. w. Atkinson bringing
suit to secure an injunction
against the Southern Express Com
pany from enforcing it's order re-
fusing to deliver shipments OF. whis-
key in South Carolina for personal
use. The injunction was granted
by the court, the decision being
written by Chief Justice Gary and
concurred in by Associate Justices.
Woods, Hydrick and Watts Asso-
ciate Justice Fraser says: "I con-
cede that the above statement so
strongly made is correct, but 1 dis
sent from the judgment. The reg
ulation complained of in the petit
tion refers exclusively to interstate
has no jurisdiction to interfere"
A test case was brought under
the same conditions in Kershaw
county and the court granted the
injunction in this case on the same
grounds as that from RichIand