officially given by four of the Justices of our Supreme Court. They are
expressed in no doubtful or hesitating form of speech:

Chief Justice Taney said: "If any State deems the retail and internal
traffic in ardent spirits injurious to its citizens, and calculated to
produce idleness, vice or debauchery, I see nothing in the Constitution
of the United States to prevent it from regulating or restraining the
traffic, or from prohibiting it altogether, if it thinks proper."--[5
Howard, 577.]

Hon. Justice McLean said: "A license to sell is a matter of police and
revenue within the power of the State."--[5 Ibid., 589.] "If the foreign
article be injurious to the health and morals of the community, a State
may prohibit the sale of it."

Hon. Justice Catron said: "If the State has the power of restraint by
license to any extent, she may go to the length of prohibiting sales
altogether."--[5 Ibid., 611.]

Hon. Justice Grier said: "It is not necessary to array the appalling
statistics of misery, pauperism and crime which have their origin in the
use and abuse of ardent spirits. The police power, which is exclusively
in the State, is competent to the correction of these great evils, and
all measures of restraint or prohibition necessary to effect that
purpose are within the scope of that authority."--[Ibid., 532.]

That the State has a clear right to prohibit the sale of intoxicating
drinks, because this sale not only hurts all other interests, but
destroys the health and degrades the morals of the people, has been
fully shown.