Bisbee daily review., 1915-10-09
GLOBE LAWYER GIVES
LEGAL ANALYSIS OF
LIQUOR AMENDMENT
According to His Views Inter
state Commerce as Applied to
Personal Rights Is Matter
Over Which Federal Law Rules


GLOBE, Ariz., oct. S.-Speaking Of
the personal privilege aspect which
newspapers throughout the state have
construed into the now famous deci-
sion of Judge Shute, regarding the
right to import liquor into the state
for personal consumption, an eminent
member of the legal fraternity gave
out the following interview to a rep
resentative of the Arizona Record re-
Gently:
"As day after day the newspapers
of this state take up the question of
whether liquor can be introduced into
the state of Arizona for personal use,
one cannot help but be struck with
the very many reasons given for the
opinions which have been handed
down upon this one subject; and even
to the mind Of a layman some Of them
are so palpably wrong that it seems
that the time has arrived when there
should at least be a good reason given
for the many decisions, regardless of
what the individual interests or opin-
ions may be.
Baxter. judge Of the Superior court
Of Yuma county has recently held the
constitutional amendment in Arizona
as bull-strong and pig-tight,' and that
liquor can not be introduced into the
state for any reason; and the line of
reasoning which he uses is interest
ing TO say the least, and is clearly the
effort Of a layman and not the effort
of lawyer-or. rather. it might be
better to say that it was the effort of
some man attempting 90 do something
that he knew absolutely nothing at all
about. and the citation to the 18TH
amendment has about as much to do
with the question as the 10th amend
ment
ITO begin vat the bottom of this
thing. il is probably within the mind
of every layman, to say nothing Of
lawyers, that the constitution of the
United States reserved to Congress
the exclusive right TO regulate com.
merce between the states; consc-
quently no state can pass law pro
hibiting the Introduction of any arti-
Gle into the state. except by permis
sion Of Congress. Through the in
fluence of well meaning prohibition
lists there have been several bills in
troduced and passed in Congress at
tempting TO affect the introduction of
/ Intoxicating liquor; the most recent
/ of these Us the act commonly known
as the Webb-Kenyon act. which re-
lieves Intoxicating liquors of their
4 interstate character. and is the con-
. sent of Congress TO the different
+ states to regulate the introduction of
Intoxicating liquor into state. The
terms of that act must be consulted
in order to ascertain just what the
state can do and it makes no differ
ence whether il be a constitutional
enactment or a legislative enactment
lin fact, about all our constitution is
anyhow, statutory enactment
1T must be clear that without the
. Webb-Kenyon act the entire consttu
tional amendment, so far as it at
tempts TO regulate commerce between
states, would be void as being in
.derogation Of the constitution of the
/ United States.
Now when we turn to the terms
of the Webb-Kenyon act which has
recently been construed by the Su
preme court of the United States, We
find that it only makes unlawful ant
prohibits the introduction of intoXi
eating liquor where it is attempted
no be introduced, received, possessed
sold or i'm any manner used In viola
tion of any law Of the state. territor,
, or district into which it is attempted
. to be introduced
IAN lawyers know, and most lay
men. that there is no law in the stat
E of Arizona which prohibits one from
having In his possession or using I'm
toxicating liquor consequently to shi
it into the state for personal ms
would not be in violation of any Law
d Iof this state.
1T therefore follows that the Webb
Kenyon act nowhere grants to tn
d state the right TO prohibit the intr'
r. duction OF intoxicating liquor for pei
sOnal use there being nowhere an
law in this state making it unlawft
r to use 1t for personal use.
r. III I have been thus far followed
il must be clear that the Webb-Ke
" yon act has no application, and d
effect to change the general rul
e States may not regulate commerce
wholly interstate, and before an II
dividual could be guilty of the Grim
e of introducing Intoxicating liquor int
ID Arizona, he must be proven to haN
. brought It in to sell exchange, Civ
barter or dispose of"
:" MYSTERIOUS MURDER.