Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1912-03-04
HEARING IS STORMY
Continued from First Page

mont to show that prohibition did not
prohibit.
Tho trouble is Senator Works re-
marked" that the liquor can be obtained
to stop the manufacture of liquor"
Stop making wines, brandy and all
those things?" responded Mr.. Magruder,
a note Of surprise in his voice.
Certainly" Senator Works remarked.
What is to become of your state?' Mr.
Magruder flashed back.
You needn't trouble about California. -
from Mr. Works There was applause
from the temperance forces. A minute
later Mr.. Magruder paid a tribute to Cal
ifornia wines.
Il am glad they sell good liquor, If
they sell 1t at ALL Senator Works COM
mented. This was the chance for the
liquor advocates to applaud; and they did.
Senator Works suggested that Mr.. Ma
gruder consider the subject from moral
as well as from money standpoint and
asked if Mr.. Magruder would take the
same position from a moral standpoint.
II do not change my POSITION said Mr..
Magruder. Il don't take any water at
ALL" The temperance forces caught up
the mention of water during the defense
OF liquor. and great shout of amuse-
ment drowned out Mr. Mag1uder's fur
Their statement.
Priests Defend Liquor.
Father Valentine schmitt of st. Jo-
seph's Catholic Church. introduced as a
defender of the liquor side of the question,
began by remarking that prohibition does
not prohibit
If the time ever comes when there
will be no bread in this country there
VIII ne whisky" he continued.
-Ihere is no use passing laws that
can't or won't he enforced. If you make
laws too strict you make bad worse. You
NOT A.
liquor dealers.
believe in temperance. 1t is a cardi-
nal virtue. But a man won't be made
better or temperate by legislation"
Rev. Father Meagher of ST. Dominic S
Catholic Church followed to oppose the
legislation before the committee.
Il am against the bills. because some
are impossible and others lead to pro-
hibtion.'' he said. And am sure. from
personal experience, that prohibition does
not prohibit. And if we do not have
places in Washington where thirst can
be satisfied the people will find illegal
places, will get liquor, and the result will
not be pleasing to the people here
Father Maegber said he did not believe
In further raising the license fee. The
present fee, he contended, is high enough
to wipe out of existence the Objectionable
places.
His church is in the southwest section.
and Father Maegber came to the defense
Of the section. He said the people there
compare favorably with people in other
cities or in other sections of this city.
Question Of Personal Liberty.
1T would be a hundred times better
think every. one will admit If there were
no liquor in the world Father Meagher
remarked. But. We are meeting a con-
dition and in meeting that condition.
am opposed to any change in the present
excise laws of Washington
Louis p. Shoemaker expressed himself
as well satisfied with the present liquor
law, and that the chief of police is doing
his best to enforce the present good regu-
lations of the traffic.
LAS you know, we of the District of
Columbia are deprived of our political
liberty he said. And l ask you not to
deprive us of our personal liberty
James l.. Feeney, who said he never
tasted liquor or tobacco, claimed the
privilege. he said, to take a glass Of beer
if he wanted it. Many of the prohibition
workers, he maintained. have been
liquor-drinkers and failed to drink up
all the liquor in Washington" and now
want to keep from other people what
they can't enjoy.