Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1916-01-20

~" bottle 10 his neighhor's lips for
gam .! 10 traffic in any wa! with the
prhhr morals. ana it favors undount-
"dl: TIC passage Of q law so framed a.
70 r,eNcut interstate shipinen, o. IT,
puur# 10 he used for sale by blind.
tigers ami huotier;,crs. But do .hc
people OF Virginia expect the raSsar a
% law which viii go beyond the ~ :
.rcisc of the pole" powers OF the
state and 10 prevent til. sh!pmcn, II
liquor Into the STATE for purpose. #
sale contrary 10 Law. "r Ito the pcpplc
Of The state expect the passage - Il,
Ia" 10 prohibit III" individual citizen
from procuring t:,oNicauts IN amy
quantity anywhe:c for his own per-
sonai use in Ills own home. ra"r.
arc many thousands OF voters WHO .,rc
thoroughly convinced and believe that
q law should hc PASSED at ;his tine
prohibiting absolutely all shipments NJ
liquor into tho state. except for scieu.
tihc. mechanical. ircdical and sacr.-
mental purposes. They believe Nc
time has fully come to pass AN ;ica.
law. Il IS needless To say that ,.our
committee is entirely. sympathetic ;vita
the aim desired by these persons
The Greeks bringing Gifts.
Th.:" arc some ether persons VII,
are exceedingly emphatic as ~ III.
duty "s the -inti-.Saioon League AMI OF
the General Assembly on this poin,
The editors Of SOM. of the "wcttcst'a
newspapers in the State. who ridicui.d
the prohibitory idea. who slau.i,rcii
and rilihed the prohibition WORKERS
land leaders. who eXcrtcd themselves
10 the utmost to defeat the State wiG q
law. arc now demanding that the pro.
idbit"ry law shall prohibit absolutci,.
All interstate shipments for personal
use They ridicale the laws of Ala
baffai. Georgia. Moth Carolina anl
other states. which permit a limi,e,,
INTO The state for personal use They
are almost violent IL. their demand fer
: Ieuulh' prohibition Follow!us
iheir lead. there are in various corr.
nuuities many r.cr. who voted and
worked against Statewide prohibi,i,a
in the election, who arc now most in
ststcnt for an irnnclad law
The Ideal Condition,
IT Is needless for your committee 10
state that every member Of il longs
Tor the day 10 come when the use of
Intoxicating liquors for beverage pur-
poses VIII entirely cease. 1t is the idea
condition for which we most devoutlv
pray. But, after a full consideration of all
the facts. your committee is persuaded
That. while many thousands OF voters
think the time has come for absolute
prohibition of Interstate liquor ship
mcnt. tho majority OF those who voted
in the Statewide election did no, in
tend hy their Totc Ia go further than
10 forbid tho traffic III Intoxicating.
beverages III Nriinia. and did not in
tend 10 prohibit an individual citizen
from obtaining ardent spirits for his
own personal use.
Anxious for Failure of Law.
Your committee is satisfied that tho
former opponents Of state wide prohi :
hition, who are now clamorinc So
loudly for an ironclad Interstate shin
mcnt Law. do not themselves belle: Q
that the majority of the voters of Viz
Einia expected or intended that such
a law should hc passed. and these for
: mcr opponents arc eagerly expecting
land ardcntly hoping that the Anti
saloon League Will recommend and
that tho Legislature will pass an iron
clad interstate shipment law. and thus
cause rcvusion OF feeling ana n
change Of sentiment, which will re-
suit in the noncnforccmcnt and break
ing down of the law and its subsequent
repeal.
Nhnt May tho LAW Prohibit
The second question which your com
mit,ee has felt Obliged TO take into
account is, To what extent may rho
law prohibit the use or possession Of
Intoxicating liquors hy the indivilual
Tor personal use" II l. admitted on
IAN sides that the law may place n
reasonable limit upon the amount az
intoNicahis Which may bo held or pos
scSSca by an individual owing to tho
posSihlc-indced, Notwithstanding of
such liquors with intent to sell I'm yio-
lation of the law. Various states have
passed laws limiting the quantity OF
intoNicants which may be shinped in
ito individuals FOR personal use. and
such laws have been declared To hc
IAN exercise OF the police powers Of the
state TO prevent the importation of in :
toAicantS TO be sold contrary 10 tnc
law OF the state. These limited shin.
mcnt laws have hcon upheld as To mo
principle underlying them. Eu, tho
/, United states supreme Court has mover
yet passed upon the question ms ~
I, the right of the State to prohibit ,hso
lutciy the shipment of intoNicants into
Il state Tor the personal use OF the pur-
chaser. The nearest approach to this
question is the case which is "a, M.
cnt pending in tho United States Su-
prcmc Court from West Virginia which
case does involve this principle TO Some
extent. Your committee had honad ta,t
this case would he decided before mo
meeting OF the General Assembly of yir-
ginla lad the Supreme Court passed
upon this case and decided thu, ,bc
'Legislatur. OF state could prob., -
interstate shipments in any ouanti,v
whatever for personal use tho l...1
question which confronts Your commit
tee would have been decided Bu, III, :
case will not be heard until February.
81. and IL is not likely that the decision
Will he handed down until after tho
Adjournment of the General AssemhIy
OF Virginia. should the United States
supreme Court decide that the State
Legislature could not prohibit inter
state shipment of liquor for tho per-
sonal use Of the purchaser and tho In W
passed by the Virginia General Assnm
bly, should be so framed as to prohibit
any interstate shipment for personal
use, that portion OF the law would be
declared unconstitutional. and there
would be then no provision In the law
for the restriction of interstate SHIN
ments, and no protection against The