Fort Mill times. [volume] (Fort Mill, S.C.) 1892-current, 1913-05-22
CAN STILL SHIP WHISKEY
: IF FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY

That there is no statute by the
State of South Carolina prohibit
ing the importation of whiskey
from another State for personal
use and that the Webb act gives
the State the right to enact such
statute, if it so desires, is the
decision of the supreme court in
deciding a case testing the con-
stitutionality of the Webb act
which was passed by Congress,
withdrawing the protection of
interstate commerce from whis-
KEY shipments from one State to
another. The supreme court
held that the old dispensary act
forbidding the ordering of whis-
key for personal use from other
States, having been declared un-
constitutional, before the pas
sage of the Webb act, could no.
be vitalized by the passage of the
Webb act.
1T is not the intention of the
Webb act to interfere with the
policy of the State in regard to
the importation of liquor but
merely to provide that the en-
forcement of a State statute
would not be interfered with or
hampered by the interstate COM
merce laws, says the decision.
In other words, the act in
tinues the decision. while it is
incumbent on the State to enact
Legislation of an active nature if
they are desirous of prohibiting
the importation of liquors for
personal use or other purposes.
Bnt even if Congress had under
taken to give validity to an
unconstitutional State statute it
would have been beyond its
powers.
While the legislature can not
pass an act. validating the pre-
visions of the dispensary statute
which we have declared to be
unconstitutional, so as to give it
a retroactive effect. it, neverthe-
less, has the power to adopt a
statute with similar provisions
having a prospective effect, pro-
hibiting alcoholic liquors from
being imported into this State.
Such statute would not
contravene any provision of the
United States con titntion. AS
we have already said, the recent
act of Congrt SIS divests intoxi-
eating 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 l of the 14th amendment
to the constitution of the United
States which provides that no
State shall deny to any person
within it's jurisdiction the full
protection of the laws"
The case arose in Richland
county through W. w. Atkinson
bringing a suit to secure an in
junction against the Southern
Express company from enforcing
its order refusing to deliver ship
ments of whiskey in South Caro-
lima for personal use. The in
junction was granted by the
court, the decision being written
by Chief Justice Gary and con-
CURED in by Associate Justices
Woods, Hydrick and Watts.
Associate Justice Fraser says:
Il concede that the above state
ment so strongly made is correct,
but | dissent from the judgement.
The regulation complained of in
the petition refers exclusively to
interstate commerce, and | think
this court 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
Richland.