Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1915-01-14
FEDERAL COURT UPHOLDs
WEST VIRGINIA STATUTE
Prohibition Laws Held to Re Valid
by Judge Woods, OF Appel
late Court.
STOPS LIQUOR SHIPMENTS
Consignee Must Show Common Car
riers That Goods Were Ordered
Without Solicitation or ADVERTISE
ment by Consignor.

Unless the consignee can show con-
clusvcly that liquor was ordered by
him for his own personal use. with
out advertisement on the part of the
consignor and without solicitation by
letter or otherwise. common carriers
may be restrained from making de-
liveries within the State of West Vir-
ginia. This decision was made yester-
day by Judge G. A. Woods, of the
United States Circuit Court of Appeals,
who in n lengthy opinion, reversed the
lower court, and entered an order in
favor of the State of West Virginia
restraining the Adams Express Com
pany from making a delivery of an in
terstate shipment The court upheld
the rigid prohibitory laws OF West
Virginia in every particular.
The case was the first brought by
Fred o. Blue. State Commissioner OF
Prohibition, to test the laws of West
Virginia. which went dry" on July l.
1914 The bill of complaint was filed
on September 15.t against the Adams
Express Company. the shipper and the
consignee. in the Kanawha County Cir
cult Court; and a temporary injunction
was granted. The case was subse-
quently removed to the United States
District Court for the Southern Dis
trct of West Virginia. at Charleston,
where on October 10 the injunction
was dissolved by Judge Keller. An
appeal was noted. and the case came
into the appellate court here one month
later. and was advanced for a hearing
on the docket. In order that the con-
troversy could be settled
BRIEF SUMMARY
nE,
Briefly to summarize the case, it may
be said that citizen Of West Vir-
ginia received price lists from n whole
sale dealer in Cincinnati. The laws OF
the State make this method of solicit
tation misdemeanor. The order.
however. was filled and the shipment
made with the Adams Express Com
pany. On It's arrival at Charleston the
suit was brought.
The state contended that the effect
Of It's own legislation and the Federal
legislation contained In the Webb
Kenyon act and the Wilson bill is to
make 1t unlawful for the Ohio dealer,
holding n Federal license, to use the
mails to break the West Virginia In ws.
which, it asserted, were valid police
measures. AS the offending party
lived outside Of the State, he could not
be reached by It's criminal machinery
and on that ground the court was
asked to declare the common carrier
common nuisance if 1t persisted In
aiding and abetting these law infrac-
tons.
The defendants answered that the
effect of the West Virginia statutes
was to prevent the shipper from cxer-
cisinE his constitutional right Of using
the United States malls to solicit orders,
and that if tho Federal acts permitted
this, that they were necessarily con-
trary TO the Constitution OF the United
States and could not be enforced. 1t
further contended that the defendant
company had no way of obtaining in
formation as to whether the shipments
werc Intended for personal use or had
been ordered as result Of solicitation
or advertisement, and to impose such
q duty on IL would constitute an
illegal and unconstitutional burden
(Contihued On Tenth PaBe.)