The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1909-10-10
Ed SMITH RAISES
ANOTHER QUESTION
Amendment Does Not Prohibit
Gift, Barter or Exchange
WHAT LEGISLATURE CAN DO
Thinks "Whisky People" Need Not
Fear First Section But That Good
Citizens Should Fear the
Second Section.

To the Editor of The Age-Herald:
May I take advantage of your policy
of permitting Individual discussions Of
the proposed constitutional amendment
in the columns Of your paper. to submit
a thought which have not yet seen ad-
yanced?
Senator Miller, as I understand the re-
ports of one of his speeches, has argued,
in effect, that if the amendment is
adopted, wee need never fear that any
legislature would nullify its effect by re-
pealing existing laws or penalties, in toto,
since every member of both senate and
house will have sworn to support the
constitution of the state; that the whisky
traffic, In all its forms, will be prohib-
tied by the terms of the amendment, and
that, therefore, the prohibition people can
thus settle the whole question and rest
easy by voting for the amendment, which
will be binding on the legislature forever,
or until repealed.
Mr.. Brooks Lawrence, in trying to ex-
plain why constitutional prohibition does
not prohibit In his own state, and thus
settle the question for prohibitionists
there, reads the Ohio provision, so 1t is
reported, and carefully explains that 1t
does not in terms prohibit the buying and
selling Of liquor, but only forbids the
LICENSING of these acts by the legis-
lature. The argument or intimation be-
ing that while Ohio does not LICENSE,
but TAXES, and permits buying and
selling, our own Legislature cannot, under
the amendment which is proposed permit
the buying or selling In any way.
If we examine the first section of the
amendment, which We are to vote on, 1T
seems to me that 1t will be apparent. in
view oFfacts which we all know, that
these gentlemen, as well as the Trainer
of the amendment himself, are somewhat
lacking In guile, If it was intended and
thought that this amendment would or
could furnish a direction to the legisla-
ture which could never be evaded, or
under which the legislature could never
establish again the whisky traffic in Ala
bama without direct violation of the
legislative oaths.
Quoting that portion Of the amendment
pertinent we find:
1.-THE manufacture, sale and keeping
for sale Of alcoholic and malt liquors and
other intoxicating beverages shall be for
ever prohibited in this state"
I do not apprehend that this language
would prevent a future legislature, In
terms, from authorizing either the GIFT
or the BARTER or the EXCHANGE of
these liquors; nor would either section OF
the amendment prohibit the legislature
from authorizing the storage OF such
liquors for such purpose. Not to elaborate
the subject too far, we have but to call
to mind the Raines law in New York to
furnish the illustration of a possible
method of emasculating such a provision
and remember that such q thing is pos
sble as the BUYING OF a sandwich and
being GIVEN a glass of beer, which only
reverses the system which quite common
ly obtained In Alabama during the sa-
loon regime-of buying a drink and be-
ing given a free lunch.
Even should the amendment be adopted,
If future legislature Of Alabama should
follow Ohio's example and seek pretext
for restoring the liquor traffic without
violating the letter of the constitution.
do not imagine guile will be lacking in
any degree, and can see that many;
pretexts will not be impossible Of discov-
cry as the amendment stands.
submit that 1t is not the whisky
people" who need fear the first section of
the amendment, but the good citizen of
the state who should fear the vicious
effect of the second section. Very truly,
e. d. SMITH.
Birmingham. October Q, 1909.