The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1913-03-09
Ask injunction Compell-
ing Express Company
to Handle Product.
BARS SHIPPING TO
SOUTH CAROLINA
Richmond Office of Southern Ex-
press, Under Orders in Effect
Since March S, Declines to
Forward Liquor to Pal
metto State Points, and
Dealers Lose Heavily.

Dealers Lose Heavily.
The first attack upon the constitu-
iionality of the Webb Kenyon anti
liquor bill recently passed By Congress
over President Tafts veto, was made
yesterday IN the United States Dis
trict Court for the Eastern District OF
Virginia bv Richmond and Petersburg
Wholesale liquor dealers, who applied
to Judge Waddill for an Injunction 10
cnjoin the southern Express Company
from refusing 10 forward to consignees
in South Carolina shipments OF liquor
intended solely for personal consump-
ton.
Acting under orders from the Office
iii Atlanta, the Southern Express Com
pany. in Richmond. has, since March
D. enforced an order against accepting
liquor shipments destined for South
Carolina. This action was taken, it
is claimed. on advice of the express
company's lawyers. who. after an eX
animation OF the South Carolina liquor
laws. concluded that, enforced By the
webb * cnyon act. the laws of that
State prohibited the Importation OF
liquor for any purpose whatever under
penalties shared by both consignee
ana carrier
With the law threatening fines and
Imprisonment; for every man in its
employ in South Carolina. the express
company declines to accept further
consignment for that State until pro-
tected bv the courts either by direct
mandate or 10y the voiding of the
Webb -kcuyon act
Dealers Seek Injunction.
Pleading a state OF affairs that is
causing thousands OF dollars loss
daily. Richmond and Petersburg
Wholesale liquor dealers applied for
a temporary injunction TO cnjoin tho
southern Express Company from de-
cliuing 10 accept shipments destined
for South Carolina. charging that the
Webb Kenyon act. az we'll as the
South Carolina laws which re-cnforcc
ii, are unconstitutional. and in viola
ton of the rights OF interstate com
nercc.
The formal application FOR the in
junction was iicd by H. Clarke s:
Sons. OF Richmond The petition was
presented by Attorneys H. NJ. Smith.
jr.. ana James W Gordon. who intro
duccd with 1t sworn statements exc
cuted by the Phil c. Kelly Co. NJ. l.
Hessberg & Son and other wholesale
liquo. dealers OF this city. in support
OF thc statements made ia the Clarke
petition. Similar statements were pre-
scnted on behalf OF wholesale deal
Drewry. lawyers Of thst city
Judge Waddiil heard argumen, pre-
sented by attorneys Smith. Gordon and
Drcwry for the liquor dealers and
hy Attorney Thomas ". shelton, of
Norfolk. for the southern Express
Company. takinS the whole ma tier
under adviscmcni at the conclusion of
the hearing. uniil Monday He Will
rule on the petition foI the injunction
t.....
ing.
CumpHny Wants Protection.
according 10 the statement Of its
attorney the Southern Express Com
pauy regards ;hc Webb Kenyon act as
unconstitutional. but is unwilling to
place itself in jeopardy by ignoring
/, until told to do so by the courts. =
peculiar condition OF affairs in South
Carolina, Mr.. shelton pointed out.
makes the company liable to prosccu-
tion for every shipment OF liquor 1t
carries into the state
In 1896 the Legislature OF South
Carolina passed law creating the
disnensaty system, which has been in
force ever since. The act contains a
section which provides that all in
toNicatine liquors found in the State
shall be considered contraband unless
purchased from one Of the State dis
the right OF seizure. for the fining and
imprisonment Of all persons or agents
found to possessed OF contraband
liquor
In 1909 the South Carolina Legsla
ture passed law now Incorporates d
as Section Sl5 of the Penal Code. max
Ing ii unlawful to solicit the sale OF
intoxicating liquors intended for other
than personal use. This act it was
t,.I
the liquor dealers. carries the infer
encc that liquor intended for individual
consumption may be freely brought in,
and is evidently intended to supersede Q
the stringent law that was framed in
1896
South Carolina Inv Conflicts.
The contemporaneous existence Of
these two acts in the statute books of
South Carolina. the lawyers claimed.
create confusing conflict. The first
expressly bars from the State all liquor
not purchased from the dispensarics,
and the second. if not explicitly, by in
ference, appears TO admit spirits If in
tended for personal consumption. The
situation would have been clear had
the act of 1903 contained a clause re-
peaiing all former laws i'm conflict with
it,. No such clause. however, was in
cluded.
No trouble was encountered until the
passage of the Wcbb-Kenyon act. The
express companies carried and deliv-
cred all liquor shipments destined for
South Carolina without question and
without interference from the authOri-
ties. The Webb Kenyon law. however.
prohibits the shipment OF liquor into
State ito be received. possessed, sold,
or In any manner used" in Violate
of any law of such State. In this pro-
vision lies the express companies fear.
w Wah h-L ~
yon law, the South Carolina act OF
1895, the company fears. threatens TO
fine and imprison each one of it's en-
ploNes in that State. for any shipment
ii undertakes TO carry into South Caro-
Continued on Second PaEeQ