THE WETS AND THE DRYS

Shannon News, 30 April 1926, Page 4

THE WETS AND THE DRYS

AMERICA’S PROBLEM , AVALANCHE OF ARGUMENT SAN FRANCISCO. Prohibition is the most cussed and discussed question in the United States to-day. It is in the public prints. In jirivate is is a continual theme of conversation. Even the staid United States Senate losss its dignity when the subject stalks across the floor. In the House of Representatives the members wax warm and call each other names on slight provocation when the “wet” and “dry” issue enters, either innocently or as part of the regular business. The history of the question covers half a century of argument. Fifty years ago the great cities of the United States were "drinking shops, usually open seven days a week,, frequently never closing their doors, except for the three sacred hours on Good Friday. Temperence students are agreed (that the saloons were responsible for the onrush of “dry legislation. They made trouble for themselves. ,(Progressive steps toward Prohibition may be taken as read. The famous Eighteenth Amendment was the first step taken by Congress to prohibit the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquor. It was ratified by 46 of the 4& States, and the average vote in each of the State Legislatures was 80 per cent, in favour. The Volstead Act. There is some misunderstanding as to the connection between the Eighth eenth Amendment and the Volstead Act, named after Congressman Volstead, who introduced it. This law was passed by a majority in Congress. It can be amended by a majority. It was necessary to set a standard to determine what should be considered as intoxicating liquor. Congress agreed upon one-half of one per cent, of alcohol, and in so. doing, legistated in conformity with the laws of a number of the “dry States, and the United States Supreme Court has repeatedly decided that the standard named is consistent with the purpose of the legistlation in the States.

Have ; the people of the United States voted on the Eigtheenth amendment? No, on the referendum vote. The American Constitution cannot be amended by direct vote of the people. There must first be> two-thirds Congressional action. Next the individual States, to the number of at least 36, must ratify the submitted amendment before it can enter the Cbnstitution, and this ratification must follo;w and the Assembly of each State Legislature An adverse vote in either of the bodies named 'would prevent ratification. There must be a' majority in each, regardless of the toal vote cast. Difficulties of Repeal.

Can the Eigtheenth' Amendment he repealed? Yes, but it is practically impossible to do so. An effort to repeal would first necessitate the election of a “wet Congress. The recent congresses have been “drier” than their predecessors. To-day the approximate vote is 72 “dry Senators to 24 “wet Senators and 320 “dry Congressmen to 115 “wet Congressmen. It

would take man years to reverse this vote, and the possibilities are exceedingly remote, for a goodly proportion of the States are rock-ribbed “dry ’ Assuming a two-thirds “wet” vote in Congress for re-submission, it would then be necessary to secure at least oft State Legislatures to vote for oepeal . Exactly as 13 State Legislatures could have kept the State Eighteenth Amendment out of the United Stajtes Constitution, so 13 States can keep it in. Therefore, it is a seeming impossibiility seriously to consider repeal, and the attacks on the “dry” system are aimed at the Volstead Act. It is known that at least 30 State Legislatures would vote to retain the Eigtheenth Amendment. Futhermorc no constitutional amendment has been repealed. Can the Volstead Act be amended? Yes, a majority of the two houses of Congress can increase the alcoholic content. But it must be firmly remembered here that the Eighteenth Amendment is superior to the Volstead Act, that the Amendment prohibits the manufaclture. and sale or intoxicating liquor, and the United States Supreme Court hits consistently stood as a barrier against the “wet” attacks during the last few -years. Those favouring a. return of “light wines” know, if they have read the decisions, that it is impossible to manufacture wine with a sufficiently low alcoholic content to come inside the Eighteenth Amendment, and to pass 'the Supreme Court. “Light beer” is on a different footing, because or its lower proportion of alcohol. The Status of To-day.

"Wets” and “drys” agree that the American saloon must never return regardless of what happens ' in tne future. , There soms to be unanhnity thait strong - ah o hoi beverages should be prohibited .though the “drys” are far more unanimous on this point than 'the “wets” The stand-out fact is that Prohibition is not the com plate success its adherents claim arid it is equally true that it. is by no means the dismal failure described by its opponents. If the problem were in the hands of the Anglo-Saxon group, with the. English conception and respect of law, the “dry” legislation would succeed earlier but complications follow the large foreign oiements in the population. Surprising are the side-lights on the question. The “wots” say bootlegging - is rampant, that “hijackers (those ’.that steal from bootleleggert>< constitute a new menace, that drinking is common that boys-and girls are using flasks and imbibing as nevei before, that the Public Service, has become debauched, that fraud permeates the enforcement of Prohibition, and that the citizens object to the curtailment of their liberties especially when more evil results than would follow sane liquor laws backed by public sentiment. The “drys" point to the absense of drunkedness in the streets, compared with former days, to ithe exaggeration of liquor lapses, to the unfairness or classifying all'boys and girls as law violators, to the unusual- prosperity, (o the banks bulging with money, to the home building and th e automobiles owned by workers, to the decrease in the use of alcohol, ito the noticeable saving in human life stated by the Congressional Committee to represent 1,000,000 lives), to the heavy reduction in Federal taxes, to tile fewer paupers that now reside in tli,, limited States .to the gains or women and children, and they rerer to the regrettable aid foreign liquorites give to fighting what should be a domestic laiv. As one wise man put it, Prohibition will either emerge from the present “wejt drive in a strongly-en-trenched position, or modification or the Volstead Act will result. Advantage of • the Drys. The "drys” have natural advantages. The treaties with foreign governments, and particularly -the one with Cuba, just signed, will proven*, more and more, the illegal entry or alcohol liquor The Eigtheenth Amendment and the Volstead Act are on the stature books, Superhuman. legislative efforts will be necessary ! o change or modify either. President Coolklge is a “dry” and the dominant Republican Party is even more strongly committted to the system than the Democrats . The la, ; ttcr hi the “Solid South’’.are at outs with their “wet” brethren in New York. Chicago, and other moist centres. ,Il is claimed lafv enforcement Is better than formerly, and reference is made to the Government’s anxiety to have the law observed by all, as shown by the action of taking a Congressman out of his seat and putting him in the Atlanta Federal penitentiary for two years for violating the Volstead Act .

The real test on“ the liquor problem in the United States” wilj come later in Ithe year, ■when a number of new Senators and Congressmen Avill be elected. The “wets” have given notice that they are going to etecr. their own kind. The “drys” have accepted the challenge The votes cast will decide between the two groups In the meamvhile, impartial and accurate data could be obtained to cl turn- support or disprove the charges against the Eighteen tli Amendment and the Volstead Act. WILL J FRENCH.