The Washington herald., 1918-06-17
"DRYS' DENY
"COLLUSION'
WITH "WETS''
Article Accusing Brings
Replies from Prohibi-
tionists.

York newspaper article that there Is
even reason to believe the whisky
ring worked secretly with prohibI-
tion agitators. when the food bill
was passed last year enraged lead
ers of the dry forces. What they
especially objected to was this para
graph:
There Is even reason to believe
the benefciaries of the present cor
ner in whisky secretly co-operated
with the prohibition agitators to
bring about the adoption of the pro-
hibition rider to the food bill for
the obvious purposes OF increasing
tremendously the value OF their
holdings"
@Absurd,' Says sheppard.
Morris Sheppard. Senator from
Texas. author Of the national pro-
hibition amendment and leader of
the drys in the Senate. said:
Absurd Utterly absurd! The
writer OF the article Is careful to
say IT Is believed or like words. He
would not dare make such q state
ment positively"
DR.. z. C. Dinwiddie. secretary of
the Anti-Saloon League. said:
IF such Q charge Is made posi-
lively, IL Is an unmitigated false
hood. There was no cooperation
whatever. The whisky men did
not know what we were doing. We
went out for something on our own
hook. and we got 1.-THE prohibition
OF foodstuffs In liquor manufacture"
The article in question said the
whisky spectators, realizing what
high prices would result when the
whisky supply was short. have
made enormous profits. It was said
ring of spectators and profiteers
had cleaned up S1,0oo,0o0,00o.
SProbabIy True"
That is probably true" said Sem
Gtor Sheppard. "and It Is only anoth-
er reason why the Jones amendment
now pending before the Senate
committee should be adopted
TITS an additional argument against
the sale Of whisky. Why should these
men be allowed to make gigantic
profits?"
The Jones amendment will be con-
sidered today in open hearings by the
Senate Agricultural Committee. and
speeches will be made pro and con.
The prohibition fight is approaching
a more acute situation daily. Some
Senators have argued that the Jones
amendment Is unconstitutional. in
that 1t prohibits the sale OF whisky
already manufactured
"Cnconstitutional"' said Senator
Sheppard yesterday in regard to this
statement why. we have done al
most everything else so far We want
ed in this country under the guise of
war measures. don't see why we
can't stop the sale OF whisky
Il cannot say in advance Of the
NrANA NkA
ment what action will be taken, but
Il looks like a prohibition COMMITTEES
to me. and believe the Jones amend
ment or some other will certainly
reach the Senate floor for discussion
says "Drys" Would Win.
The Senator Is quite sanguine that
IL a vote is taken on prohibition on
the Senate floor the drys will win.
And DR.. Dinwiddie takes this Opt.
inistic view also. The Anti-Saloon
League official said in regard to the
newspaper article:
How could there have been any
cooperation? The whisky people did
not know what was going to happen.
II was a business proposition. Any
one could have foreseen that the rider
might result in increasing the price
OF whisky. But there was also the
possibility OF the government COM
Wandering all the whisky, as was
proposed.
And If the government had COM
nandeered all the stun. the vast
financial profits alleged, which are un-
doubtedly true, would not have been
possible. It's another argument for
the withdrawal of whisky from sale.
We gave the President power to
y--sNI
know why the authority has not
been exercised or what the reasons
are. The War Department says it
cannot use the 'Iotgut' on the mar
ket and in warehouses, for it can
not trust its purity. The depart
ment also claims 1t can buy alcohol
In the market cheaper than it can
distill It from whisky
Can Go to Any Extreme.
When DR.. Dinwiddie was asked
what he thought of the legality of
the Jones amendment. he replied:
IF this Is unconstitutional, then
no piece Of war legislation yet pass
ed Is constitutional. hold the gov
ernment can go to any extreme to
save Its life in war-time-in order
to furnish an army, build ships, save
on. I think the Supreme Coury,
knowing these things. would hold the
amendment constitutional We might
not be able to uphold the matter in
peace times, but in wartime it is
different
We go into homes and take men
FOR the army and smash their ca
reerA What's more sacred about
whisky and beer than about a man?
We take peoples property for hous-
ing purposes. What's more sacred
about booze than about property?
IF we get the Jones amendment
before the Senate on a square issue
II will pass. And IL we don't succeed
with Il either in the committee or in
the Senate-although do not believe
that-we will follow It with another
measure"
Some conservative prohibitionists
fear bringing on a fight for an alb
solute "bone-dry" amendment at this
time. Senator Kenyon, of Iowa, IA
vors a compromise. Senator Smith,
OF Georgia, Is satisfied with the pres
ent status.