New Mexico state record. (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1914-19??, 1919-01-24

They may. January IA in San Fran
cisco a court order was secured tenn
porarily restraining Gov. william D.
Stephens from si3I ing the ratification
OF the amendment. It was indicated
that similar action might be taken in
certain other states. 1t was said at
the office of the California Grape
Growers association that such action
Is possible In II other states. The
states, according to the association,
are: Arkansas. Colorado. Maine, Ne
vada. New Mexico. Oklahoma. Oregon,
Utah. Washington. Missouri and Ne
braska.
In these states, 1t was said, all legis-
lativs actions can be. under the Inv,
referred to the people, and that In
many of them the people have 60 days
In which to take a referendum.
Anti.saIoon League.
The dry side of this legal PROPOSE
ton is thus set forth by the Anti-Sa-
loon league:
Article V of the federal COnstitu-
ton provides that the legislature or
n state convention Is the only body
which can ratify an amendment to the
Constitution. Congress is given the
power to say which one shall have the
authority. Congress had chosen the
state legislatures as the bodies to rati-
fy the federal prohibition amendment.
A state referendum therefore would
be illegal and void"
The Anti-Saloon League Of America
has probably had more to do with
bringing about prohibition than any
other n agency. 1t vas founded in
1895 and is nonpartisan and nOnsec-
tartan. Its purpose is the extermina-
ton of the beverage liquor traffic. 1t
is a coalition of the Anti Saloon
League Of the District Of Columbia.
the Anti-Saloon League of Ohio and As
other national. state and local tenn
perance bodies. 1t has branches in
all states. 1t Is expected to have an
active part in providing legislation for
the enforcement of prohibition under
the eighteenth amendment.
1t is possible that the vets may also
attack the legality of the action Of
congress. BY some the view is held
that the amendment was not properly
submitted to the states by congress;
that 1t vas adopted by two-thlrds Of a
quorum present and voting. whereas
according to the Constitution it should
have been adopted by two-thirds Of ali
members elected. If the resolution
submitting the amendment were to be
declared unconstitutional it would lead
to much questioning, for virtually all
Of the amendments to the Constitution
have been adopted by a two;thirds
vote of the members present rather
than a two-thirds vote Of all members
elected to congress.
Amendments Of the Past.
The first national prohibition
amendment was proposed by Senator
II. w. Blair of New Hampshire as
early as 1876. 1t provided for the
prohibition of the manufacture, sale,
ilIilVOA lutlOh iii CAlJoI tutIOu VI SDlllI
Gus distilled liquor for beverage pur.
poses. He introduced such Il bill nine
times between 1876 and 1896; in 1886
he changed it to include all alcoholic
liquors.
Senator John d. Works of Califor-
mia introduced into the senate in 1914
Il bill providing for the prohibition of
spurious liquors, excluding wines and
beers. 1t received no support from
the national prohibition advocates.
December 10, 1913, Congressman
Hobson of Alabama introduced the
"Hobson resolution" The
original resolution placed the enforce
ment Of the law In the hands of the
national government, but 1t was so
amended as to divide the responsible.
Ity between the state and federal gov.
in order to secure the sup
port Of certain advocates Of States
The original resolution was
amended eight times by Hobson him.
self and was finally voted on Decem.
Der %. 1914, receiving 1877 votes, 25S
being necessary to carry through the
house. 1t never came to a vote In
he senate.
When Does Prohibition Prohibit
Senator Morris Sheppard of Texas,
.uthOr Of the amendment, holds that
rational prohibition will 90 into effect