The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1916-01-28


ect In fact there is prohibition wave sweeping over the
country lust now and we feel that this argument will be good
reading just at this time.
ercrcd 5it the effect of crcIdin& particular articles from
such commerce.
(d1 In Holden . Hardy 100 So. 500, involving the
validity OF statute OF Utah limiting the period OF employment
of woren in underground mines in the smelling reduc
ton or refining or oils or metals to eight hours day the
statute held to be valid exercise OF the police power OF
the State
Mr.. Justice Brown, speaking for the Court, said;
THE right of contract however is itself subject certain
limitations which the State may lawfully impose in the exer
else of its police power While this power is inherent in all
governments has doubtless been greatly expanded in its
pcaon during the past century, owing to the enormous IN
crease in occupations which dangerous so far detrl-
mental the health of employees demand special pre-
caution their wel-beng and protection the safety OF
adjacent property.
Whe this power necessarily inherent in every form of
government was prior to the adoption of the Constitution
but sparnov used in this country As then almost
purely agricultural people, the occasion for special pro-
lection of particular class did exist Certain profitable
bIoynen such as lotteries and the sale Of Intoxicating liquors.
z0ch 7ere then considered TO be legitimate haze since fallen
qder the ban of public obion and either altogether
prohibited or made subject stringent police regaonS
The power to do this has been repeatedly affirmed by this
Court"
In the same case it was shown that individual under the
police power may be protected by the States from himself
and that the State has interest the Webeng OF the
indivdual:
But the fact that both parties are of full age and
peten to contract necessarily deprive the State of the
power to Interfere where the parties do stand upon
equality or 7vEere the public health demands that party to
the contract shall be protected against himself The State still
retains an interest in his 7vcar hoe0r reckless he may BE-
The cioe is no greater than the of all Of the Par and
zcep the individual health safety 7vare IS sacrificed or
aegIected the State suffer-
7-TE REAL PURPOSE OF PROHIBITION PRE-
VENT PERSONAL, USE OF LIQUOR.
It seems strange at this late day to hear claim made that
the State and National Governments guarantee citizen the
right to possess and receive liquor for personal and to
drink the same unlimited quantities If such had been the
case difficult how any of prohbitOy law could
have ever been sustained all of them have direct ten
dency to reduce prevent the of intoxicating beverages
and the purpose of all of them promote temperance by
the prevention OF the consumption of ntoNcants This pur
pose has found repeated expression in adjudged cases.
In the early case of Lincoln a. Smith, u Vermont 328
find the following statement:
Though the act of our Legislature is entitled act to
prevent the traffic intoxicating liquors for the purpose of
drinking yet the primary object and end Of the d7V IS the pre-
zenon of utemberance bauben and crine and the pro-
hibition medium through 7och the
object and end the lac TO be attained If be granted
that the of Intoxicating liquors drink is than
useless and inemperance legitimate consequence of such
use and that nteprance evil injurious to health and
sound morals and productive of paupe and crime it seems
to u.s. that law designed prevent such consequences must
clearly fall within the class of laws denonnated police
aons The legislature passing the law in question: doubt