The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1914-12-29
THE PRECEDENT FOR NATIONAL PRoHI-
ErT1DN.

Opponents of national prohibition by State
action on an amendment 20 the Federal Constitu
ton have been wont to satisfy themselves with
the contention that thu regulation Of the liquor
traffc BY national legislation is new field OF
national eudeavor and one in which the national
government can enter only at the peril of that
sacred and convenient war cry, States Rights,
The current issue of the OUTLOOK prints In its
editorial columns resume Of tie action Of the
national Congress in regard to the traffic in
opium not only between this nation and other
nations but between States of this Union. In
other words we now have national prohibition of
the opium traffic the Federal government con
trolls interstate shipments of the same, and pro
vides rules and regulations for the conduct OF
the traffic in opium for medicinal purposes. We
print the outsooks editorial In full that our
readers may have the benefit of all the informa'
ton on the subject. We call particular attention
to that paragraph which reads
lit fthe anti-opium propaganda resulted, In
the first place in the prohibition Of the import of
opium except for medicinal purposes This was
followed by legislation prohibiting Its manu-
facture and export. Final legislation limits Its
interstate transportation"
Here we have already the statute books al
most the identical legislation desired for the
prohibition OF the traffic in intoxicating liquors.
II is to be noted that this legislation was passed
by Congress without reference to State Legisla-
lures for ratification. It is not amendment 10
the Constitution OF the United States II is
sumptuary legislation of the rankest kind. IT
nfa r{vht oF NJ
this traffic The Federal government provides
the machinery for enforcing the law and under
takes to see that it is enforced, The Commits
sioner of the Revenue lis charged with the duty
OF enforcing the law. NO new army Of Federal
employees" is found necessary. No objection is
made by any State to this direct attack on the
rights OF States to control their own AFFAIRS. No
State has objected. and no congressman asked
for instruction from his constituents No con-
gresham felt 1t necessary to refer the matter TO
a referendum of his people to have them tell him
how To Ierform his duty. Why? Because the
government of the United States knows that the
opium traffic Is innimical TO and destructive of
the best quality OF citizenship, thought. muscular
activity brain and health, The government saw
It's citizens destroyed by opium and set in TO
destroy the destroyer For every one man or
woman who dies or Is disabled from the use Of
opium there are scores and hundreds who are
killed or made paupers. criminals. insane by
alcohol. Shall pluck out the mote of opium
and leave the beam of alcohol? Does there not
reside In Congress the same power over one evil
as over the other? Are we to conclude that the |
powerful whistey lobby, the ever'present whiskey
influence, Is the determining factor In the situa-
tion when representatives take away our
sacred States rights to control the opium traffic
and leave the liquor traffic In all its power prac'
tically protected and licensed by the Federal gov
ernment to defy the viii Of States where it is /
not wanted? We have the precedent which /
30 base our action why not act?