Evening star., 1917-02-15
HOUSE COMMITTEE
SPLIT ON DRY BILL

Wet and dry members Of the District
committee of the House lined up along
sharply defined lines this morning at
the hearing on the Sheppard bill, pro-
posing prohibition for the District Of
Columbia.
Following the statement of Frank A.
Kidd. employe of the government print
ing Office. that 'the government of the
United States is engaged in the liquor
business" the testimony of the witness
was halted while the pros" and AN
tis" argued among themselves the rela-
ton Of the government to the liquor
business throughout the country.
Chairman johnson Of the committee
stated that the government under no cir
circumstances licenses traffic in liquor. and
claimed that the federal tax on such traf-
flc is to all practical purposes a penalty
for engaging in the business. Wet men,
bers of the committee Immediately ad-
yanced the argument that, inaSmuch as
the government under no circumstances
would derive q considerable portion Of its
revenue from a business which it re-
garded immoral. the fact that it does
derive income from the liquor interests OF
the country implies that it regards the
business as a meretricious one.
Calls It Subsidy.
"The government does. to all practical
purposes, subsidize the liquor business
In Washington" said Chairman John
son. "And I know that there are mil
lions Of citizens throughout the country
who are vigorously opposed to this
subsidy, which has resulted in their
paying in taxes to the District of
Columbia ovc- S1O0OO0O0"
The fact that referendum is going
to be strongly supported by certain
members of the committee was en-
phasized at this mornings hearings.
Representatives of various labor or
ganizations appeared as witnesses be-
fore the committee, and said that
organized labor as whole in the
District is against the proposed bill, in
asmuch as 1t fails to provide for =
referendum by which the people of
known their desires in regard to such
legislation.
Witnesses From New York.
Two Of the witnesses. ]. H. Holland,
president Of the New York State Fed
Grafton Of Labor, and Earnest Bohm,
corresponding secretary of the Central
Federated Union Of Greater New York
and Vicinity. appeared before the COM
mittee at their own request to argue
against the bill.
Both of them expressed the belief
that labor is generally opposed to pro-
hibitlon, and urged that the bill be
amended SO as to provide for a refer
endum. IL was the opinion of the wit
nesses that a clean and honest vote,
expressive of the real wishes of tn.
ha f9i
Mr.. Holland said tho union labor men
Of New York were almost unanimously
opposed to prohibition Representative
Mapes said that the committee had re-
ceived letters from labor men in Colo
rado, recently made n dry" state, saw
ing that labor was now convinced that
prohibition was good thing. Both
Mr.. Holland and Mr.. Bohm suggested
that this probably was the individual
opinion of the writer's.
Governed by Public Sentiment.
During the testimony of Mr.. Bobm
Representative Tinkham asked IL ,t
were not true that public sentiment
largely governed the enforcement of
prohibition laws. Mr.. Bohm agreed
with him, saying it was all the more
necessary that vote be had here.
Mr. Tinkham, who lives in Roston
said it would be- quite difficult to en-
force prohibition in that city. whore
sentiment is against it.
Despite the fact that Billy Sunday
came to Boston and waged a camnaien
and the agents of the Anti-SaIoon
League were there" said Mr. Tinkham
I'VE recently voted wet by the Iargeat
majority in many years"
Frank A. Kidd opposed the bill in be-
half of brewery workers. firemen and
stationary engineers in the District
whom he represented. on the ground
that 1t would rob the community of it's
substance and fail to put an end to err
listing evils in the traf1c
Mr.. Kidd said the District was enti-
tied to a vote on prohibition, which
should not be forced upon the community
"willy-nilly IN this unnatural way"
He estimated that approximately 1000
workers-brewers, clerks and helpers,
drivers. bartenders and porters-would
be thrown out of work in Washington
ut Is claimed" he said, That these
men may be absorbed in other employ
ments. That may be true in a thriving
new city like Denver. but IT would not
be true in Washington. with its lack
Of Industrial establishmeHts Some of
these men have been engaged in their
line OF work for forty or forty-five
wears. It means the breaking up OF
their0home and removal elsewhere. A
matA SO affecting the community