Chapter 25
Justice Haufensehn finished drafting his opinion early that afternoon, which stated, in pertinent part:
“The issue in this case is whether a pernicious, highly addictive substance of unknown origins called Smokeless Green (apparently due to the fact it is ingested via inhalation rather than by smoking it)—that fuels days’-long orgies of drunkenness and debauchery abhorrent to any civilized society and whose users have been known to raid public market places in broad daylight while covered in human filth and bereft of clothing in order to search for this substance—is poisonous. To ask the question is to answer it.
“The appellee would have us conclude that only if a substance brings about immediate or prompt death can it be deemed a poison, but we must flatly reject this foolhardy, and dangerous, proposition. The evidence clearly shows that Smokeless Green poisons many users’ moral judgment, which in the aggregate will lead to—and has already begun to lead to—greatly increased crime rates throughout our society and the deaths of many at the hands of desperate fiends seeking their next dose. The society of our republic may be viewed as a single entity whose body will be greatly damaged and possibly even destroyed by this vile substance. For these reasons, we are left with no choice but to conclude that Smokeless Green is a poison and thus presents no Article 8 problems.
“As for the ‘gentlemen exception,’ while this may be of great interest to the appellee, who apparently wishes to divert this court’s legal focus into the foray of analyzing hypocrisy, this is beyond the proper scope of this court. If the senate wishes to permit an exemption to a very special segment of our society that has extraordinary financial resources, education, and moral judgment with which to safely dabble in the recreational use of this substance, that is fully within the senate’s prerogative, and appellee’s counsel has offered no convincing evidence or argument as to how this exemption proves Smokeless Green is not a poison.
“Article 8 does not require that all poisonous substances be wholly banned. It merely forbids the senate from banning a non-poisonous substance. For the reasons stated above, Smokeless Green clearly is a poisonous substance, which gives the senate the constitutional right, but not the duty, to ban it. Thus, if it seeks to limit its ban, it is fully within its rights to do so. It may in time decide this substance is so pernicious that it will be banned even for gentlemen, but this is beyond the scope of the current matter.
“For all these reasons, we reverse the district judge’s misguided, facile opinion finding SISA unconstitutional and order him to resume the trial with all judicious speed.
“Reversed.
“Haufensehn, J.; Beckle, J.”
He showed it to Justice Beckle, who gave it a quick once-over and then signed his name below where Haufensehn had taken the liberty of printing it. Haufensehn stopped by Chief Justice Revdel’s office, grumpily expecting him to not have anything ready yet, but to his surprise he handed him his opinion before Haufensehn could even ask for it. His face gave some hint as to the venom contained therein.
Haufensehn acted disinterested until out of sight from Revdel, and then he opened it and began reading voraciously.
“Today our Republic was dealt a grievous wound. But the arrow fired into her Constitution was not fired from a foreign invader but from those specially entrusted to uphold her laws.
“The issue in this case is whether a new substance of unknown extraction popularly dubbed Smokeless Green is a poison. If it is, then its ban under The Safety in Selegania Act (“SISA”) is constitutional, and appellee Mr. Stephenson’s felony trial for violation thereof must resume with all judicial vigor. If it is not a poison, then SISA is facially unconstitutional under Article 8, and the district judge’s decision invalidating SISA and dismissing the criminal charge must be upheld.
“The appellant would have us believe that, although Smokeless Green is an immensely popular ingredient amongst the gentry and is ubiquitous at any party hosted by such, it is a poison. Based upon this information alone, any reasonable mind would conclude this substance is not a poison. After all, unless our nation’s gentry wish to exterminate their own kind, why would they retain for themselves the right to continue to use a poison while simultaneously protecting everyone else from it?
“After the vacuous rhetoric has been extracted from the appellant’s written brief and oral statement, what is clear is that the appellant’s argument is that Smokeless Green is possibly not poisonous in the medical sense—i.e., in the most literal meaning of the word—but rather causes various harms to the individual and therefore does so indirectly to society. Namely, a person addicted to Smokeless Green may soon find himself unable to afford it, and therefore he begins stealing, robbing, burglarizing, etc., in order to obtain his next dose. Since the gentry will not have this financial impediment to their wanton intoxication, they will not have to go down this road of lawlessness.
“However, the appellant would have us believe it irrelevant that it is only because of SISA that Smokeless Green has now become almost unaffordable for non-gentry. We cannot, and will not, reach this absurd conclusion. From the onset of this drug’s entrance into our society until the moment SISA was passed, the price of Smokeless Green was not much more expensive than coffee or regular tobacco and was thus well within the financial range of all but the most penurious denizens of our republic.
“It was only after SISA that Smokeless Green entered the black market (with the exception of a handful of elitist gentlemen’s clubs, all of whose members could legally obtain Smokeless Green, and at which facilities Smokeless Green has thus lawfully continued to arrive from its unknown source) and rapidly became nearly unaffordable. Undisputed evidence has shown that in many cases the result has been for Smokeless Green to be sold in a heavily diluted form to poorer customers, thus keeping it affordable, while those who are wealthy (yet below SISA’s lofty gentlemen criteria) buy it on the black market in its pure form at exorbitant prices.
“In brief, this red herring by the appellant can be justly exposed as a fraud when closely examined. If Smokeless Green is not a poison to the gentry because it is affordable, then it would therefore not be a poison to the masses if it were affordable. And since in the absence of SISA it would be affordable to the masses, the only thing making Smokeless Green a ‘poison’ is the poisonous SISA law itself.
“Article 8, as the appellee has convincingly demonstrated, has its roots in a bloody era of our nation’s history, a period of bloody civil war when corruption shook our government to its very foundations. The corruption and the bloodletting stemmed from our Republic’s attempt at prohibiting alcohol. Out of the ashes of that war came Article 8, which was written broadly to prevent the senate from banning substances and only providing a narrow exception, which is for the prohibition of poisons.
“The only slightly credible way in which Smokeless Green could be deemed a poison has been revealed supra to be not based on Smokeless Green’s inherent properties but rather on the artificial financial consequences of the drug being banned. It should be noted that even if Smokeless Green led to such financially driven crimes based upon something less artificial—e.g., transportation costs for the drug, production costs for the drug, etc.—it would still require a very minute analysis and exceptionally strong evidence of addicted users committing crimes in order to obtain this drug because they could not afford it. And even then it would only be with great reluctance that a court could properly find that an acceptable means of rising to the level of ‘poisonous’ as defined in Article 8.
“But since the financial connection to the drug addicts’ crimes is not based upon any inherently expensive qualities of the drug—otherwise, why was it infinitely cheaper when legal?—but rather to its prohibited status, it is unnecessary and inappropriate to engage in such an analysis.
“This leaves only the argument that Smokeless Green is poisonous in a moral sense: It is highly addictive and becomes irresistible to many people. While
there is little doubt that it is addictive and irresistible to many, this alone cannot make it a poison. Anyone who has lived his life outside of a cave knows of the power alcohol can despotically wield over an individual, causing innumerable destructive consequences to his professional and family life as a result, in addition to damaging his health.
“Nonetheless, it was in the context of the conclusion of the bloody war over alcohol prohibition and the repeals of alcohol prohibition laws throughout the entire country that Article 8 was added to our Constitution. Thus, it is clear that by ‘poisonous’ Article 8 did not intend to permit the prohibition of substances that were simply injurious to the individual’s, or society’s, health and well-being but rather those that were poisonous in the more literal sense of the word—substances that bring about death shortly after consumption.
“The majority has decided today to ignore the historical context within which Article 8 was written and instead permit a highly broadened interpretation of ‘poisonous’ and thereby open the floodgates for what may tragically be a new era of bloodshed and civil war.
“Therefore, not only for the judicial record but also for the record of posterity, I hereby adamantly dissent from my colleagues.
“Revdel, Chief Justice”
Haufensehn swallowed hard and squeezed his eyes shut tightly to prevent a tear from escaping but to no avail. He was tempted to march down to Beckle’s office and apologize and tell him that he was signing on to the dissent to make it the majority opinion and to ask him if he would do the same or become the dissent.
But then his wife and child came to mind. They had to come first. Not the law. Not even the country. His family. But, surely, this would go to the Supreme Court. Anybody with an inkling of common sense knew that. So, this wasn’t the end of the road for Mr. Stephenson. And Megders was a good attorney, and he would make sure to keep his client out on bail while the appeal process continued to transpire.
And if the vigilantes wanted to go after the Supreme Court, they would find that a bit more difficult because there were fifteen of them, and they all had at least one security guard assigned to their houses at government expense. So, he wasn’t sending anyone to prison. He was just looking out for his family. Heck, he might even report the vigilantes once they returned his wife and son, but one thing at a time. He first needed to get this decision sent to the district judge without delay so that he could see right away whether the vigilantes had any intention of really returning his kidnapped family members.
If they didn’t, he would go public about what happened, and he would see to it that the largest manhunt in human history took place. He wasn’t without friends in high places in the district’s police force or even in the army. He could fight if it came to that.
He went outside, instructed his coachman to take him to the district court’s office, and once there, he marched right into the district judge’s chambers and set the decision down on his desk.
“The Stephenson case proceeds. See to it.”
“This is an outstanding breach in protocol, Justice Haufensehn.”
Haufensehn normally did not deign to exercise the arts of hypocrisy, as he rarely had need, but with the convincing skill of an actor, he summoned a look of indignation to his face and plopped down the newspaper on the district judge’s desk describing the threats the drug peddlers had made, warning the court to find SISA unconstitutional.
“Not a breach in protocol, Justice Willington. Just sending a message loud and clear to those criminals who would seek to intimidate the guardians of our Constitution.”
An indignant look still in his eye, he then turned away haughtily from Justice Willington, whose face had I’m sorry written all over it, and walked outside, feeling a potent sense of self-loathing with every step.
“Take me home, Matthew,” he instructed his coachman.
He didn’t feel like even attempting any further work today. He had a lot of thinking to do.
When he walked inside the front door to his home, he found all the blinds closed and the interior encased in darkness. After a few steps, his foot struck something hard, and he went tumbling onto the ground, bruising his forearm and giving his head a nice rap against the floor in the process. Furious and spewing profanity like a spitting cobra, he stood to his feet to see what unworthy object had dared molest him in the sanctity of his own home.
He walked gingerly, like a blind man in a room full of snakes, and violently opened up one of the blinds, allowing a powerful beam of sunlight to come punching through the glass and illuminating the source of his vexation.
There was a large chest, worthy of holding the booty of an accomplished pirate, and on top was attached a note. Warily, he picked it up, unfolded it, and began reading.
Congratulations! You have chosen to put the interests of the people over the clever arguments of a snake-tongued lawyer. We told you we were not criminals, and inside this chest is the proof. And your maid is safe and sound too. We tied her up and gagged her—with respect for her dignity in the process—so that she did not spoil your opportunity to be the liberator of your family. We are family men ourselves! Your maid is safe and sound in the kitchen.
A warning, however! Do not make the mistake of thinking that your reunion with your family would make it prudent to seek police action against us. If you do so, we will know. And you will be utterly unable to predict or stop our next visit, which will prove to be a fatal one.
We wish nothing more than to return to our honest occupations. Banditry has never been our calling in life, but we will not stand by and watch our nation destroyed by Smokeless Green. If you betray us, you will come home one day to find your family in a very similar chest but cut into tiny pieces! Don’t sacrifice their lives in an impotent attempt to satiate your resentment against us.
Guardians of Selegania’s Future
Haufensehn noticed a key attached to the back of the piece of paper, and he rapidly tore it off. He almost put it into the chest’s lock without another thought, but something gave him pause. Would his wife and son really be there? Why was there no sound?
With great trepidation he put the key into the chest. Expecting great resistance, he was surprised to find it turned easily. The padlock then snapped open after he gave it just a slight tug.
He took a deep breath and then opened the chest.
As soon as he saw its contents he shrieked!
His wife and son lay lifeless, no hint of a gag on either of their mouths, and yet there they lay, as still as the dead, not a tremor in their chests to be detected. Hot tears rolled down his cheeks.
He extended his hand to his dear wife’s face, expecting to be met with the icy confirmation of death. To his surprise, instead his fingers felt warm, pulsating life. He bent down and kissed his wife’s cheek.
“Rachel?” he said softly. He put his finger underneath her nose, and sure enough he felt air coming and going, but in slow, nearly imperceptible breaths.
They’ve been drugged, he told himself.
He then quickly checked his son’s pulse, although not with the same zeal with which he had inspected Rachel for signs of life. His son was alive.
He ran to the kitchen to check on Sarah. Sure enough, she was tied and gagged, but the now slightly audible sounds coming from her gagged mouth and the tears streaming down her face obviated the need for any doubt about her being alive.
After he freed her from her bonds, she began to explain hysterically that she had been overwhelmed by such sudden force that she had never had any chance to resist the masked assailants, yet when Haufensehn inquired delicately about any injury to her person or dignity she assured him that other than being tied up she had not been harmed in any way.
“Rachel and Timmy are by the door,” he said somewhat coldly, adopting the more-distant tone with which he normally addressed Sarah now that he was relatively confident of his family’s safety.
It was an hour later when they awo
ke, and although they were both groggy at first, their thrill upon realizing they had been liberated overcame the potent effects of the drug. With hugs and kisses, they assured Haufensehn that they had been well treated aside from having their freedom of movement restrained. He inquired briefly about where they were held, but they had no helpful information, as they had been blindfolded when abducted and then driven around for hours within the city before being taken to an unknown location, within which they were blindfolded until placed into a locked room.
As the tears flowed and the hugs continued, he felt satisfaction for his decision, and, he reminded himself again, the Supreme Court would hear the case. He would see to getting a guard to prevent further attacks, but retaliation for what had happened was unthinkable. The criminal proficiency of these “Guardians of Selegania’s Future” was rather alarming, and while he had his doubts about whether a group of sundry professionals could suddenly carry out such well-coordinated crimes while escaping all detection, he realized there was nothing but futility in such speculations.
If you betray us . . . .
No, he wouldn’t do that. Of that, he was sure.
The International Businessman Page 27