The Birmingham age-herald., 1909-10-23
SECTION Z STILL
 POINT OF ISSUE Weakley and Smyer Both Sub
 nit Opinions BOTH 60 INTO DETAILS Weakley Writes Letter to Age-Herald and Smyer Renders Opinion at
 Request of Several
 Clients.
BOTH 60 INTO DETAILS

Communications reaching The Age-Her- ald yesterday present a direct issue on the meaning of Section ? of the proposed constitutional amendment.
 Judge weakley states without equivoca- tion that Section will in no wise modify or repeal Section of the bill of rights in the present constitution.
 D. J. Smyer, prominent Birmingham attorney, in an opinion submitted to a number of clients on the meaning and in- tent of Section says: '1f Section does not relate to Section of the existing constitution and seek to modify it or prevent construction of it I am unable to find any provision in the ex- isting constitution to which said Sec ton does refer.''
 Weakley's Letter.
 Judge Weakley's opinion Is in the form of letter to the editor of The Age-Her- aid as follows.
 In one of your recent issues you re- fer to the fact that both the Carmichael bill and the Fuller bill recognize the sanc- tity of the home and that this was nec- essary under Section of Article of the constitution of Alabama of 1901 which declares that the people shall be secure in their homes from unreasonable searches or seizures, and that no warrant shall issue to search any place or to seize any person or thing without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation.
 You contend that Section of the pro- posed amendment Is an attempt to re- peal Section of Article I so far as liquors are concerned and you ask me to answer, fairly and without evasion of any sort. whether you are correct.
 It gives me pleasure to answer your question in plain terms, and to assure you that, in my opinion. Section of the proposed amendment would in no wise modify or repeal Section of Article I.
 Section of the proposed amendment has nothing whatever to do with searches and seizures, or with the practice in such cases. It merely requires the constitu- tion to be so construed as to authorize the legislature to designate places where liquors may not be kept or stored. What ever place is designated by the legisla- ture would have to be searched if at all, in accordance with the provisions of SectlOn OI Afllcle 1-lndl IS, ODly upon a warrant issued on probable cause, sup ported by oath or affirmation.
 The two sections have an entirely diff ferent field of operation. I believe that no well-informed lawyer would contend for a moment that Section of the amend ment would repeal or modify Section of Article I.
 Furthermore, Section uses the word designate" which carries with 1t the idea of selection, and not the idea of destroying all places where liquors might be stored or kept. The legislature has always recognized the right of citizen to keep liquor in his home and there drink and serve the same. and it Is not be- lieved that any legislature would ever otherwise declare, even if 1t could.
 It is my opinion and that of many oth- CT lawyers who have studied the sub feet, that under Section 2 the legisla- ture could not designate the bona fide home as a place where liquors may not be stored or kept, since to do so would destroy the federal right which the cit izen possesses to order liquor and have 1t delivered to him, and to keep 1t some where.
 Furthermore, the keeping of liquor in the home is not of injurious public ten dency, nor Is it open to the objection that such keeping might be made the means of evading the law; hence, the keeping of liquor at bona fide home would not fall within the police power" Yours very truly. SAMUEL D. WEAkLEY.
 Birmingham. October 9, 1909.
 Letter to Smyer.
 MT Snyers opinion is the result of a request by number of clients. as ex- plained in the following correspondence: MT. D. J. Smyer, City.
 naor cfr- Craaf dfffera0ca of OpjniOQ has been expressed as to the effect of the prohibition amendment to the constitution if the same is ratified on Novembery29.
 Having great confidence in your ability as a constitutional lawyer we want your opinion, from legal standpoint, of the amendment. and especially as to the fol- lowing:
 1. Would. under the terms of section 1. anyone in Alabama have the legal right to make wine for sacramental purposes?
 9 Would, under the terms of section 1. our wives have the legal right to make. for home use and consumption cordial