The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1917-12-24

provide for it's decision by the legis-
lature without giving the democracy
opportunity to express it's will.
The success of prohibition in any
state depends in some degree~o on the
policy of adjoining states. If the state
on one side of the river is wet" while
that on the opposite side is dry the
border towns in the dry state will get
the evils of the liquor traffic without
the revenue, and even in the interior
of the state the difficulty in enforcing
prohibition will be the greater because
liquor is obtainab1e in the adjoining
is necessary to a test of prohibition
under fair conditions, and the only
power which can enforce this coop
GRAFTON is the general government.
UNIFORMITY NOT NECESSARY
On the other hand, the success OF
woman suffrage does not depend upon
cooperation among the states. If this
policy is the proper one for a par
ticular state, it's success in that state
cannot be jeopardized by the failure
of surrounding states to adopt 1t. The
imposition of it's voters cannot be jus
tilted on the ground that uniformity
in the policy of the states on this ques-
ton is necessary to fair test of the
policy Therefore favoring submission
of an amendment for national prohibit
ton while opposing submission of an
amendment to force woman suffrage
on unwilling states involves no in
consistency.
to submit the federal amendment need
seek to excuse himself on the fiimsy
pretext that the question is ready for
settlement by the people Each of the
two leading political parties in it's last
national platform acknowledged the
right of each state to settle the ques-
ton for itself. A vote for the federal
amendment is not only reputation
of the party's platform, but a denial of
this right of state sovereignty, which,
as is now universally admitted, is a
right relating to matters of purely
local concern. A vote in Congress for
the suffrage amendment cannot be
justified except on the ground that this
doctrine Of state sovereignty is fall
lacy pure and simple and susceptible
of no practical application whatever.
AFFORDS NO PRECEDENT
We have seen that the proposed
prolibitory amendment affords no pre-
cedent for it because the regulation Of
the liquor traffic is not a matter of
purely local concern. The recently
adopted amendment relating to the
method of choosing United States
senators affords no precendent. The ma
tional concern in this matter is OBJ
vious 1t has to do with the represen-
tative character of our national gov
eminent. Besides this amendment
came in response to a known popu-
lar demand extending from Maine to
California. 1t was a mere ratification
of public opinion in all the state,
whereas the suffrage amendment is
urged on two grouds never before Of
fered in support of amendments to our
federal constitution. One is that the
ballot is a natural right" which
should be recognized in the organic
law of the nation. even if only one
woman in the United States wishes 1t.
and even If the democracy of the
United States Is opposed to its recog
milton. The other is that. as shown by
results in most states in which the
question has been submitted to the
people, women suffrage cannot be i'm
posed on the states generally except
by withdrawing the present right OF
the voters of each state to settle the
question for themselves by secret bal
! lot and leaving the decision to legis-
| latures, which vote by open ballot and
| may therefore be coerced into decis-
ions based on fear of threatening suf-
| frage lobbyists and not upon honest
| conviction.
! Every other argument offered in