Bisbee daily review., 1920-11-09

NASHlNG ON, NON. o.-NDH tue Associated Press) Storaec. of lawful ly acquired liquors in commercial warehouses aud the transportation tt such stocks to the home of the owner is not prohibited by the Volstead act under a decision handed down today by the supreme court.
 In passing upon the appeal of Will liam G. Street of New York from de- cisions of lower courts refusing to en- join internal revenue officials from seizing liquors that had been placed in a room rented from a safe deposit company the supreme court reversed the lower court and held that the in- functions should be granted.
 The effect of this ruling had not been fully appraised tonight by in- ternal revenue and prohibition off cials. The belief was expressed. how ever, that the result might be the Ie- lease of some 1O,0O0,0O0 gallons of ir toxicating beverages stored in ware houses since January Is. 1920.
 Test Case Is Planned
 Records on file here show that in addition to immense quantities Of li- quors purchased and stored by indi- vidual consumers there were in stor. age when the Voletead act became effective, large stocks held by hotels and restaurants as reserves. Whether these latter stocks came within to- days ruling has not beer; GeterInin ed It was anticipated that d test case would be filed soon on this and simi- lar questions arising from the unde- termined scope of the new interprcra- tion of the Volstead act.
 Justice Clarke, who rendered the op- .inion today, held that the transporra- tion from warehouse storage to tho owners home would be legal if the liouor had been lawfully acquired and for lawful purpose. He sand:
 That transportation of the lquorS =. is not such as is prohibited by the section is too apparent to justify detailed consideration of the many provisions of the act inconsistent with a construction which would render such removal unlawful and that the act is understood by the officers charged with it's execution as per hitting such transportation as shown by the provision of the regulations Of the bureau of internal revenue author izing permits for the transportation of liquor from one permanent residence of an owner to another in the case of his removal although no such trans fer is provided for by the act.
 McReynolds Concurs
 The opinion pointed out howeN CT, that internal revenue authorities un- doubtedly had the administrative pow CT to regulate the transfer of such liquors so as to prevent their use in violation of the law.
 An intention to confiscate private property" the opinion concluded, "even in intoxicating liquors, will not be raised by inference and construc- iotn from provisions of law which have ample field for their operation in affecting a purpose clearly indicat- ed and declared"
 Justice McReynolds, concurrinS in  the judgment of the court, dissen.ed as to the reasoning in which 1t was reached.
 q think the Volstead act was pro perly interpreted by the court below, he said. but to enforce it as thus construed would result in virtual con fiscation of lawfully acquired liquors by preventing or unduly interfering with their consumption by the own CTS. The eighteenth amendment gave no such power to congress. Manufac ture. sale and transportation are the things prohobited-not personal use
 Prohibition enforcement officials began studying the decision immedi ately. The opinion was frankly eX pressed that many changes would have to be made in the enforcement regulations but pending detailed study of the case and the circumstances sur rounding the litigation, no officia statement was forthcoming
 Limits of Decision Vague
 One effect of the decision foTesscr was the danger of increased oppor
 ---