The Republican journal., 1913-02-20
The Webb Bill Passed.
1t Prohibits the Shipment of Liquor in
''Dry'' States.
TFrom the Portland Press. I

At last, after many years of effort,
Congress has enacted a bill to forbid
shipment of intoxicating liquors in inter-
state or foreign commerce into States
that in the exercise of their police power
have prohibited the manufacture or sale
of such liquors. The Senate treated the
country to a surprise on Monday, when it
dropped its own bill for the same pur-
pose, the so-called Kenyon or Kenyon
Sheppard bill, for a vote on which, on
February 10th, unanimous consent had
been obtained, and substituted the Webb
bill, which the House Unexpectedly pass
ed last Saturday. The Webb bill amounts
practically to the same thing as the
other, and it appears that as passed by
the Senate it is identical in form with
the bill as passed by the House and diff
fers from it only in the number-a mere
ly technical difference in the title, which
may easily be arranged. 1t seems rea-
sonably certain then that the Webb bill
will presently be sent to the President
for approval, 1t is brief and it's import
ance needs no argument. Let US first
consider the text of the bill:
Be it enacted, etc., That the shipment
or transportation, in any manner or bv
any means whatsoever, of any spiritu-
Gus, vinous, matted, fermented or other
intoxicating liquor of any kind, including
beer, ale or wine, from one State, terri
tory or district of the United States, or
place noncontiguous to but subject to
the jurisdiction thereof, into any other
State, territory, or district of the United
States, or places noncontiguous to but
subject to the jurisdiction thereof, or
from any foreign country into any State
territory or district of the United States,
or place noncontiguous to but subject to
the jurisdiction thereof, which said spirit
Gus, vinous, matted, fermented, or other
intoxicating liquor is intended, by any
person interested therein, directly or in
directly, or in any manner connected
with the transaction, to be received,
possessed, or kept, or in any manner
used, either in the original package or
otherwise, in violation of any law of
such State, territory, or district of the
United States, or place noncontiguous to
but subject to the jurisdiction thereof,
enacted in the exercise of the police
powers OF such State, territory, or dis
trict of the United States, or place nom
contiguous to but subject to the jurisdic-
ton thereof, is hereby prohibited; and
any and all contracts pertaining to such
transactions are hereby declared to t e
null and void, and no suit or action shall
be maintained in any court Of the United
States upon any such contract or con-
tracts, or for the enforcement or pro-
lection of any alleged right based upon
or growing out of such contract or con-
tracts, or for the protection IN any man.
ner whatsoever of such prohibited tran
sactions.
Stripped of legal verbiage, this pro-
hibits the shipment or transportation of
Intoxicating liquor in interstate or for
eign commerce into States or territories.
with intent to keep or use it in violation
of the law of the State made in eXer-
else of its police powers; and contracts
pertaining to such transactions are de-
clared ruiz and void and not subject to
action in the courts for the enforcement
or protection of alleged rights. 1t will
be seen that no penalties are affixed,
other than the notification of contracts.
All that is purposely left out, so far as
the United States is concerned, and left
to the laws of the States. The LIQUOR
manufacturer or wholesaler who defies
the law and attempts to get around it.,
will have to depend for his pay on the
honesty of his customers. He could not
go into a prohibition State ana collect
his bill by process of law, and he would
not dare try it anyway, because he would
betray himself as the violator of a law
Of the United States.
The bill, it will be observed, makes the
intent the test. Interstate shipment is
forbidden of liquor which sis intended''
to be used in violation of State law.
This may seem at first weak point; for
it will be asked. Who is to judge the in
tent, and how is state of mind to be
determined? But Representative Webb
of North Carolina. the author of the
bill, has anticipated that objection. He
leaves the question of intent to be de-
termined by the State. Under the pres
ent law suspected liquor brought into
the State cannot be seized until it has
reached the hands of the consignees, but
under the Webb bill the State would be
enabled to attach the stuff as soon as il
had passed the border. Another point is
that the bill does not expressly except
liquors for any legal purpose, as for per.
sonal use, for medicinal, mechanical OF
sacramental use, though amendments tc
this effect were introduced and voteC
down. AS explained at the committee
hearings, the purpose is not to interfere
with liquor shipments for lawful pur.
poses, but to prohibit shipments for sale
where such sale would be illegal.
. Now the effectiveness of this or any
bill can be determined only by the test
powerful and resourceful, and hitherto
with the aid of friends on the inside they
have been able to circumvent the laws to
a great extent. They might find a way
to beat the new law, but that they fear
it is evident. This accounts for the fact
that it has taken more than twenty
years to get piece of legislation like
the Webb bill through Congress. The
brewers and distillers and big whiskey
houses WELD the might of money and
control votes. That is the true inward
ness of the situation. Every attempt to
beat the law will he made if il hecomes