The Cambria freeman. [volume] (Ebensburg, Pa.) 1867-1938, 1889-04-12
Constitutional Prohibition.

a number of the most distinguished
lawyers in Massachusetts,, including
Judge f. X. Hoar, ex Governor Castor,
John Quincy Adams and others. have
issued declaration that the proposed
prohibition amendment to the consti-
tuition OF that State would be inappro-
pirate, inasmuch as that instrument is
IAN organization of government and a
declaration of rights" and that all
police regulations and definitions of
criminal Offenses are properly left TO the
legislature for enactment by statute
law. They contend that Ito attempt to
put into the constitution matters which
were left by il entirely to legislative
action will tend to subject the constitu-
tiOn TO constant amendment, may lead
TO doubt and confusion in its construc-
tiOn, aud will tend to diminish .be hon.
or and reference in which it is held by
all men and Parties.' The force OF
this suggestion will strike every
thoughtful mind aud it is enhanced in
this State by the tact that the adoption
OF the constit utiOnal amendment will
not bring us any nearer prohibition than
we are without il. There is no Guess
tiOn but that under the constitution as
it stands a code of prohibitory laws
could be framed as radical as any code
that is likely to be adopted should pro
| hibItion be Incorporated in the cons
stitution. all that is requisite is pub
lie sentiment acting on the legislature
that will compel the passage of prohib-
itory laws. The situation viii be pre-
cisely the same should prohibition be
put IN the constitution.
But there will be this difference in an
other respect In the prohibition
amendment if adopted, all license legis-
latiOn, such as the Brooks law, becomes
void. Then suppose that prohibition
does not prohibit, and even Judge
| Agnew comedies there will be an inter-
val of non n-enforcement-how long he
does specify-sh the large towns and
| cities Of the State will be cursed with
| the free and unrestrained and untaxed
sale of liquor. That has been the ex-
| perience of other States fully as intelli-
| gent and moral as Pennsylvania, where
the constitution prohibited license, and
the resulting regulation.
Then, when our people viii have
found out their mistake, like the peo-
| pie OF Rhode Island, and propose to re-
trace their action by another vote-the
sober second thought-we of Penpsyl-
vania will find that there cannot be
another vote on constitutional prohibi~
I tiOn until five years has elapsed. The
constitution. article &VIII., says of
/ future amendments mo amendment
or amendments shall be submitted
/ oftener than once in five years" II we
vote prohibition into the constitution
IN 1889, it cannot be voted out until
| 1894, and we believe il will take ten
years TO get back to present conditions.
In the meantime, with high license
! abrogated, the hands Of the legislature
will be tied as 20 the re enactment of
such law, or any other law restraining
the liquor traffic.
This illustrates the folly pointed out
| by the leaders OF the Massachusetts, bar
/ IN protesting against putting into the
organic law of the State matters that
/ should be left entirely to legislative
I action FitfSJlrrg Post