The Birmingham age-herald., 1909-10-24

a mans dwelling house as a place where liquor could not be kept and would like wise authorize the legislature to pass laws of search and Seizure to look for and seize whisky in mans dwelling house, although 1t might be there for a lawful purpose. He stated that Judge Weakley had said on the stump that the amendment was offered for the pur- pose of evading a decision of the su- preme court in the case of Eidge vs. Bessemer; that the case of Eidge ys. Bessemer was decided by the supreme court of Alabama on section of the bill of rights, which protected the citizens from unreasonable search and seizures; that under the law as it now stood the legislature would not be authorized un- der section of the bill of rights to pass any law which would authorize search and seizure of dwelling house for goods of any description which were held for a lawful purpose, but if sec ton as offered was now adopted 1t would in part repeal section of the bill of rights and would allow the leg islature to name dwelling house as place in which liquor could not be kept even for lawful purpose, and that thereby search and seizure could be in- stituted and maintained under the law.
 He called attention to the fact that Judge Weakley had stated that the peo- pie of Alabama could not suffer, because the constitution of the United States would protect them from unreasonable search and seizure. He stated that this referred doubtless to the fourth amend ment of the constitution of the United States; that Judge Weakley had gone off half cooked and made this asser- ton without an examination of the law; that the supreme court of the United States in good many cases, and the su- preme court of good many of the states had all decided that this fourth amendment to the constitution of the United States did not relate to state mat ters at all but only to federal matters, and that 1t left the citizens of the state to the protection of the state itself on search and seizures. He cited author ities from the Gnited States supreme court reports to sustain this position and read extracts from these cases.
 He said also that Judge Weakley had stated that the people would be allowed to have liquor in their own houses by reason of the interstate commerce law.
 Half-cocked Again.
 He stated that Judge Weakley had gone off half cooked again on this proposi- tion that if he had examined the acts of Congress he would have found that years age a bill was passed known as the Wilson bill which in substance pro- yided that after liquor was shipped from one state into another that on its rival in the state to which it was con- signed it should become subject to the laws of that state; that this act was before the supreme court of the United States for construction, and that the supreme court of the United States had held that the interstate commerce laws. only protected the liquor under the Will son bill up to the time of its delivery to the consignee; after it's delivery to the consignee the interstate commerce law has no more to do with the liquor than 1t had in governing a dog fight on the streets of Tuscaloosa.
 He took up the constitutional provisions now embodied in the constitution and called attention to the difference between them and section of the proposed amend ment. He took up the question then to whether or not the adoption of this amendment would stop agitation in the state. He called attention to the states of Maine, Kansas, Ohio and South Da- kota and stated that in none of these states had constitutional provisions stopped agitation; that in fact it had been agi tated ever since the flood; that Noah himself after having had an overdose of water came out of the ark and took an overdose of wine, and that since that time men had always been agltating the liquor question in one form and another, and that if the amendment would stop all agitation in the state of Alabama 1t would do more for the people In the state of Alabama than has ever yet been done by any government or any king, prince, queen, potentate or prophet who has ever yet lived on earth has been able to do.
 He then went into the question as to whether or not there might be searches and seizures in private houses in case the legislature was allowed to pass laws as contemplated in section of the amendment and cited instances of search and seizure now and called attention to