Arizona republican., 1919-01-14
MAY NOT BRING IN
 BOOZE FUR OWN USE
 SAYSSUPREMEC COURT
rRepubIican A. p. Leased Wire1

WASHINGTON, Jan. 13.-Statutes of dry" states, permitting persons to import or personally bring in limited amounts of intoXicants for their own use, were in effect nullified by the so called Reed bone dry" amendment enacted by congress, the supreme court held today, in an opinion reversing the federal court for the southern dis trict of West Virginia.
 Justice McReynolds, in Q dissening opinion, in which Justice Clarke con- cured, held that the Reed amendment was not an interstate commerce regu- latory measure, but 8 direct meddling with state affairs, and as such purely beyond the power of the federal gov ernment.
 The case came up on an appeal Of the government from the lower court decision, dismissing proceedings that were brought against Dan Hill for carrying a quart of liquor into West Virginia, for his personal use, as per mitted by the state law. The trial court held that such transportation did not come within the meaning of the Reed amendment, which, it held, was intended to apply only to actual ship ments of liquor. The supreme court remanded the case for retrial.
 In rendering the majority opinion, Justice Day said: |.
 Tn view of the authority of congress over the subject matter, and the en- actment of previous legislation, em- bodied in the Wilson and Webb Ken yon laws, we have no question that congress enacted this statute because of it's belief that in states prohibiting eoIa Ifa pf mt eating liquors for beverage purposes, the facilities of interstate commerce should be denied to the introduction of intoxicants by means of interstate commerce, except for the limited pur- poses permitted in the statutes, which have to do with the liquor when used | as a beverage.
 Act Is Fully Legal
 That the state saw fit to permit the | introduction of liquor for personal use l in limited quantities, in no wise in | terferes with the authority of con gress, acting under it's plenary power l over interstate commerce, to make the prohibition against interstate shipment 1 contained in this act. It may exert 1 it's authority, as in the Wilson and 1 Webb b-Kenyon act, having in view the | laws of the state, but it has a power l of it's own, which in this instance it | has exerted in accordance with its | view of public policy.
 When congress eXerts it's authority | in a matter within its control, state laws must give way, in view of the regulation of the subject matter by the superior power conferred by the constitution
 Justice McReynolds said in dissent
 The Reed amendment in no proper sense regulates interstate commerce but is a direct intermeddling with the l states affairs. Whether regarded as reward or punishment for wisdom ol
 folly. in enacting limited prohibition
 the amendment so construed, I think
 goes beyond federal powers, and tS hold otherwise opens possibilities fol partial and sectional legislation whici may destroy proper control of theil
 own affairs by the several states. l
 congress may deny liquor to those wht
 live in state simply because it.
 manufacture is not permitted there
 why may not this be done for an.
 suggested reason namely because tn
 roads are bad or men are hanged fo
 murder, or coals are dug. Where il
 the limit? The Reed amendment a
 now construed. is congressional fiat
 imposing more complete prohibition
 wherever the state has assumed t l prevent manufacture or sale of intoXi cants."