The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1916-11-20

TON NONeHlDFF IJI Z, ana ma
tion-wide prohibition in 1920"
Such is the prediction or Albert z.
Shoemaker. counsel for the local Anti
Saloon League. He feels certain that
the prohibition bill that is on the Sem
ate calendar will be amended to make
this city dry at the beginning of the
next license year and passed by a
handsome majority The dry forces,
he stated, have n majority of eight or
ten in the Senate and have fully 70
per cent of the membership OF the
House.
az am confident the bill will be pass
ed and become a law at the close OF
the present license year" he told a
reporter last night. THE numerous
dry victories at the recent election will
serve to strengthen the men who are
in charge of the bill in Congress. The
bill provides against the manufacture
and sale of alcohol except for medici-
nal, scientific and sacramental pur-
poses"
November Showing Delights
Anti saloon forces throughout the
country. Mr.. Shoemaker stated. are
delighted at the showing made at the
polls November Z.
The result of the elections on the
wet and dry question" he said. Gin
dicates that the water wagon Is NOV
ing rapidly: indeed. 1t seems to have
taken on the speed of the high power
ed automobile and Is no longer
numbering along like the regulation
street sprinkler, and November this
fast-traveling machine, manned by the
Anti Balloon League, was driven all
over six States. included within their
bounds. being such cities as Detroit
and Omaha.
These six States are Montana,
which adopted a constftu n
amendment by 10000 majority; South
Dakota. constitutional amendment
by a majority OF 10000, Nebraska, a
constitutional amendment by a ma
jority of $4,000: Michigan. a consti-
tutional amendment by majority of
$4,000. and Utah and Florida, upon
wet and dry issue. each elected dry
Legislature and Governor and on the
same victorious day the water wagon
had time to run all over the great
territory OF Alaska. which also joined
the dry column by large majority.
States In "Dry" Column.
''The States now having prohibition
laws in effect. either by statutory en-
actment Or constitutional amendment,
are: Maine. West Virginia. Virginia.
North Carolina, South Carolina,
Georgia, Alabama. Mississippi. Ten
nessee. Oklahoma, Arizona, Kansas.
Arkansas, Iowa, North Dakota. Colo
RADIO. Oregon, Washington and Idaho.
IAN additional announcement to
the prohibitionists, 1t In pointed out,
that the numerous assaults directed
by the liquor interests against the dry
laws in several Of the State were all
overwhelmingly defeated. In Maine
last September strict enforcement OF
the prohibition law was an issue and
the prohibitionists won, electing the
Governor and defeating Senator john
son and preventative McGillicuddy,
and sending to Congress dry men In
their stead.
TN the elections this month
Arkansas was forced to vote on the
question Of substituting a Statewide
local law in place Of the prohibition
law. This vote was brought on by
the liquor interests In the eutse OF
the Local Self-Government League.
and the proposition was overwhelm-
ingfy defeated, the vote being more
than two to one.
.'In the state OF Colorado the liquor
element succeeded in getting before
he voters a proposed amendment to
It's prohibition law, which. II adopted,
would permit the manufacture and
sale of beer The amendment was de-
feated BY more than $4,000 majority.
Denver along defeated the amendment
by 10, 900 majority.
IN the State or Washington the
friends OF prohibition were called
upon to resist the efforts OF the liquor
interests to break down their pro-
hIbition law. Two amendments were
submitted, one to authorize the manu-
facture and sale of beer direct to con-
sumers. which was defeated by a ma
NIT the hotels to sell liquor. which
was defeated by a majority Of 160.-
o0o.,. 49,,
Won Victory In Arizona.
Down in Arizona also the drys won
an overwhelming victory. In 1914 the
State adopted a prohibition amend
rent to the Constitution OF the most
'rast'c sort II forbade shirn,en.s Of
Nqror into the State for any pur-
1cSr whatever. But the Supreme
Court OF Arizona held in decision
that since the laws Of the State did
not prohibit the use OF liquors the
safe could not prohibit introduc tons
OF liquor FOR personal use.' To meet
the wishes of the people not to have
liquors brought into the State for any
Purpose an amendment was submit
ted to the voters November I. and
ratified by a majority Of 5000. The
proposition for local option initiated
by the saloon men was defeated by
an even larger majority.
ut Is interesting to note In connec-
ton with the recent vote In Wash
sngton that the city Of Seattle. which
voted wet by a majority OF $4,000 in
1914. when the state adopted the pro-
hibition policy. went dry by 10000,
Spokane wet In 1914 by 1900, went
dry by 1900; Takoma wet in 1914 by
2.3oo. Is now dry by 10 900
These figures" Mr.. shcer,ak ,r
said, afford much comfort to the drys
all over the country They furnish
convincing proof Of the hcncacen. eff
fects OF prohibition In. that State after
ten months' trial
Oregon voted down q beer amend
ment 70 tho prohibition law by large
majority md NJ the same time added
now prohihltive features. storr.ng
some leaks AMI making tire law bone
dry California ana Missouri also
voted on Statewide prohibition, both
rejecting It, Put thnse defeats do not
seem to DISCOURAGE the dry. in the
least. in fact. they ind in the votes
Of both these States much promise Of
success a little later on. The vote in