PROHIBITION IN AMERICA.

Otaki Mail, Volume 26, 23 May 1919, Page 4

PROHIBITION IN AMERICA.

THE ACTUAL POSITION OP , AFFAIRS. STATEMENT BY EDITOR OF “NEW ■ YORK HERALD.” The following letter, received by the National Council of New Zealand, has been forwarded to-us for.publication . New York, March 2S, 1919. The National Council of New Zealand, Box 1083, Wellington. N.Z. -Gentlemen,7-1 beg-, to acknowledge receipt of your cablegram of March 27, asking Sbrtnin questions concerning the status of the liquor question in this country. . It should first be distinctly understood that there are two ~ problems of this character now agitating the people of the United States. These problems' have no direct relation to one another. The first of these is Prohibition (beginning July Ist next), enacted by Congress as a war measure for the conserve rio if of wheat, grain, etc. The necessity for this prohibition having passed with the cessation of the war, there is tnufh agitation for its repeal. The Pre-sident-of- the. United States alone lias

the power to do this under the extraordinary authority grdi'ted to him by Congress during the period of the war. He has as yet made no announcement as to liis intentions.. The only movement afoot to test the validity of this wartime prohibition act* was started a .mouth ago by certain brewing interests, which have renewed the brewing of -beer containing 2.75 per cent alcohol. Their'right to do this will, of course, i be tested in the Courts. - The more important situation deals .with' National Prohibition as an amendment to the Federal Constitution. Three-quarters of the States having ratified t his .amendment, it is now part oil. the Constitution of the United rjates, and becomes operative on Janu- ■ iiry 16, 1920. There will be a test in '•ho Courts of the, constitutionality of this amendment, although no action lias actually been started yet. There are . -ioveval grounds on which this contest ".will be waged. One is that it is opposed to the principle of personal liber y as guaranteed by the Constitution. Another is that it. lias taken -away the sovereign right of the States. The third is that it was ratified by state Legislatures without any reference whatever to the will of the i people. In Iho State- ConstituticmXof many of the States which ratified there arc specific provisions',that no constitutional amendment may be ratified without a referent-hy;.. This will undoubtedly be the basis of the chief contest. If upheld, the ratification would fall down, because nearly one-half of the l/'Statps which ratified have a provision fftn' a referendum in their State Constitutions'. j In answer to your question concerning the action of Rhode Island, two jßho.de Island Legislatures have refused To ratify the amendment. On March ,4.1 the Legislature of Rhode Island (passed a resolution authorising the. At-torney-General ot that fstatc to take steps To obtain prompt determination by the United .States Supreme Court of 'i!-.« constitutionality of the Federal {Amendment. The Attorney-General of .'Rhode Island has not as yet moved in The matter, but doubtless will later on. Your question concerning the likelihood of Prohibition creating discontent and industrial unrest is difficult to an•wCr. Tluc is no question but that there is great discontent at this time, 'most of it being over the fact that the people had no voice in this important decision.- There is'much threatened industrial unrest in "ease prohibition becomes an actual thing. It remains to be seen, however, whether such a condition, will arise. The general impression is that labour in this country will adjust itself to conditions even it' the ; conditions are distasteful. There is a great deal of agitation among soldiers and working people against the wartime prohibition act, as V. ell as the constitutional amendment. This is growing daily, but there is little likelihood, of it ever taking lawless or violent form. The principle of the recall is not in operation in this country. Therefore,* strictly speaking,, a constitutional amendment cannot be

recalled. Such amendment becomes effective when ratified by three-quarters of the (States. It is ctremcly dxffiexult to get a constiutional amendment. One ! living been obtained, it is almost impossible to get three-quarters of ihc States to withdraw it. Therefore I feel that I am conservative in saying that •if the United States Supreme Court upholds the constitutionality of the Federal amendmnt on prohibition (which goes into, effect on -January 16, 1920) it a-ill be many years before the necessary legislation can be. secured to “kill” it. If there is anything further in this matter that I can tell you, please.advise me. —Very truly yours. (Sgd.) TV. A. 'WILLIS, City and Managing Editor.