The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1917-02-25
Mr.. WATSON EXPLAINS
|. FOR VIRGINIA MEMBERS
Were Opposed To Bfme-Dry Amend
ment. But Were Pledged on
Anti-Advertisfnx.
BY GEORGE III. MANNING

Washington, d. c.. Feb. 24.-The
position Of consresSrnen Saunders.
Flood, watson. Carlin. Holland and
Harrison. OF Virginia IN voting last
Wednesday In favor of the Reed
amendmen, to prohibit the transpor-
tation OF liquor in interstate COM
merce TO dry" territory was today
explained by Congressman Walter
watson
The statement was made in view
or conflicting ana erroneous reports
OF the matter published In Richmond.
together with An unauthorized and
incorrect interview purportlnc to
have been given by the Virginia con
gressFnen.
In his explanation OF the matter,
Mr.. Watson did not presume TO speak
as the authorized spokesman Of the
other Nirgfnians who voted with him,
but merely to explain his own posi-
ton, he said and his understanding
Of the position Of those with whom he
acted
Supported Saunders Amendment
Mr.. Watson's statement is as fol
lows;
LAS an original proposition. the I'VE
Virginians who voted as / did on the
Reed amendment were opposed TO IT,
believing as they did that the general
assembly OF Virginia had gone as far
in prohibiting the Importation OF
liquor as the temperance sentiment OF
the state thought IL advisa bic 10 go
at this time. and that it was wiser to
respect the declared policy of Vir-
ginia and other states similarly stu
ated than to override state laws by
congressional enactment and perhaps
incur the risk Of renewed agitation
and possible setback In the cause
of temperance reform in those com
munities
"To this end we united earnestly
and sincerely in support of the amend
ment offered by Judge Saunders in
opposition 10 the Reed amendment,
which would have operated to change
the whole principle OF that propo .
state laws respecting the importation
of liquor IN interstate commerce.
THE vote on the Saunders amend
ment was vote in direct opposition
to the Reed amendment. The Saun-
dors amendment having been defeat
cd. the question, after some interyen-
ing motions. then required On the
Reed amendment tackled as a rider to
the section of the postoffice bill pro-
hibitinE the malls from carving liouor
advertisements into dry territory "a
proposal in accordance with Virginia
law and to which we we're honorably
committed to our respective constitu-
encies). As there w ~ opportunity
to separate the f.. Hropositions-
that is, the anti-f1i.4gi at cruising Sec
ton and the Reed anendment-it he
came necessary to vote for both or
against both.
Being thus placed In the course
of parliamentary procedure where We
had either to accept the Reed amend
ment or vote against the original pro-
vision excluding liquor advertisements
from the mails in dry territory to
which we were pledged. without any
change of opinion as to the merits
of the case we felt it our duty 70 ac.
quiesce in the Reed amendment in
order 10 deep faith on the main
proposition, believing in this course
we were fairly rejecting the conserva-
tive temperance thought o: our peo-
pie.
Speaking for myself, the report to
the effect that the attitude of my
self and other Gentlemen with whoif
voted on the subject was inconss-
tent with former declarations and hal
been changed by the size IF The ops
posing sentiment in the house was
without foundation in fact. and the
whole suggestion based upon it. false"