Wessington Springs herald. (Wessington Springs, Aurora County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1883-1891, 1888-12-07
National Prohibtory Constitutional
Amendment.
Report of Senate Committee.

BY direction of the Committee on Ed
ucation and Labor Senator Blair SUBJ
mitted July 8, 1883. /, report on Senate
Resolution No. 12. entitled Joint reso-
luton proposing an amendment of the
Constitution Of the United States in
relation to the manufacture. impor-
tation, expectation, transportation and
sale of alcoholic liquors." recommends
ing its submission to the States to be-
valid as a part of the Constitution,
when ratified by the legislatures of
three-fourths Of the several States. as
provided in the Constitution. Friends
Of che measure are expecting that the
Senate will give it consideration il
the early part of next session. The
Committee of the House of Represent.
atives, to which a similar resolution
was referred, divided on the question
the majority reporting adversely.
The joint resolution and Senate re.
port are in the following words:
"Jont resolution proposing an amen dmcnt
OF the Constitution of the United States in re-
latlon to the manufacture, Importation, eX
portatlon, transportation, and sale sof alco
holic liquors.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Eepre
senatives of the United States of america in
| Congress assembled two-thirds of each House
coneurring there in. That the following amend
ment to the Constitution of the United States
be- and hereby is. proposed to the States. to be-
come valid when ratified by the legislatures OF
three fourths of the several States as provided
in the Constitution.
ARTICLE.
! SRCTfoN l. The manufacture, importation
| expectation, transportation and sale of all
alcoholic liquors as q beverage shall be, and
| hereby is, forever prohibited in the United
States and In every place subject to their juris.
diction.
SEC. 9, Congress shall enforce this article by
| all needfullegislation.
In submitting this favorable report
upon the aforesaid joint resolution it is
proper to say that there are members
of the committee who concur in the re-
port recommending the submission OF
the proposed amendment to the States
who do not, by. such action, indicate
their APPROVAL of the adoption of the
amendment as a part of the Constitu-
,tion nor that they would themselves
advocate its ratification by the legisla-
lures of the States; but in Difference to
the immense mass of petitions for
this amendment of the organic law,
coming from the people in all parts of
the country. and believing that an
opportunity should be given to them
to be heard upon the merits of their
cause in the forum of the States, where
alone it can be heard and decided, the
majority of the committee would deem
refusal to submit the proposed
amendment to the States for consider
alton analogous to the denial Of the
right of a party to be heard in court
upon question of private right. The
method provided in the Constitution
for its own peaceful amendment
would be destroyed by failure to sub
nit the proposition for amendment in
cases of grave moment involving the
approval and prayers of multitLdes of
the people, for where the remedy
sought is admitted to be without the
jurisdiction of the fundamental law,
the petition is really addressed to the
only tribunal which can enlarge that
jurisdiction, that is to say, to the
States themselves. Should. then. Con-
gress in such case refuse to submit the
proposal to the States, such refusal
would constitute substantial denial
OF the right Of petition itself.
The changes in the National Consti-
tuition made indispensable by the
development of the nation can only be
peacefully accomplished by judicious
and liberal exercise of the power OF
Congress to propose amendments to
the States upon the petition OF those
who desire to be heard in the great
court of the people exercising their
sovereignty through the States as in
the forma tion of the Constitution.
1t is well known that, but for the
belief in the conventions of the STATES
that the opportunity to amend The
Constitution would be most literally
afforded by Congress in accordance
with the forms provided in that in
strument, the original ratification
never would have been obtained.
Some of the States ratified only because
it was firmly believed that, whatever
might be the opinions of Congress
npon the notifications desired 10y those
who considered the instrument pro-
posed for ratification as fatally defec-
tive without them, the suggested
amendments would be submitted to
the subsequent action of the States al
most as a matter OF course.
While the committee would by no
means Justify the submission of tryf-
ing or uncalled for propositions for
the consideration OF the States, yet
they firmly believe that the perpetuity
of tho oorntrv nOIAr the