The Irish standard., 1919-03-01
IS THE PROHIBITION AMENDMENT UN-
CONSTITUTIONAL?

effect its popularity seems to be waning. Notwith-
standing the ratification of the dry amendment by
forty6ve of the ortyeight state legislatures of the
country, it is boldly claimed by the "wets" that the
vast majority of the people of the country do not
favor it, and would reject by popular vote if the
opportunity were afforded to get direct expression
of their ballots. 1t is claimed that many of the
bers of the state legislature who voted to adopt
the amendment did so under the persuasion or fear
of the advocates of the measure, rather than from
sense of personal conviction to it's prudence and
expedency from fear of the loss of political prestige
rather than from their conscientious judgment on
the intrinsic merits of the issue.
That powerful reaction is setting in against the
drastic enactment cannot be denied What is seen
and heard of the opposition to it bears about the
same relation to its actual proportions the visible
part Of iceberg to it's entire bulk seven-eighths of
these dangerous derelicts of the sea being sub
merged. Many there are who would like to "take
fall" out OF the radical and sumptuary dry law but
are restrained from taking the initiative from "hu-
man respect or from other similar motive of
hypocrisy. They would be eager and willing to
have George" do it or any one else but themselves
and would back such effort to the limit, provided
they could do so under safe cover Lacking the
courage of conviction which they must concede to
the proponents of the measure, they stand in the
background grumbing, growing, whining and
threatening, but palsied by the fear of open warfare
against the impending desiccation of the land They
have slumbered upon their rights so long that they
are confronted with the loss of them altogether.
They have not been vglant of their possessions and
are about to suffer the penalty therefor in a
total forfeiture of them. %,
And if they take the trouble to look little further
forward they may discern in the "dry" statutes the
precursor of many other enactments, which are of
the same family-the sumptuary tribe. These ere
formers" are not going to stop when wines, liquors
and beers have been annihlated They have many
other pet projects up their reform sleeves Cgarets
and tobacco in all its forms, chewing gum candies
billiards. and other "luxuries of this nature are also
on their lists. They are, too looking with suspicion
on many kinds of medicines, patent and otherwise,
that may be made the sub ject of their Unsuitable ap
petite for movements for the regeneration of
kind. Who knows that ginger ale, cider, or even
mince pie will long remain immune from their pan
human schemes of "verboten"?
1t will be cheering to the wets invertebrates
we'll otherwise learn that no less an author
ity than former Assistant United States Attorney
General James M. Beck has declared his belief that
the dry amendment is unconstitutional. 1t need
scarcely be said that Mr. Beck is an authority of high
rank upon such questions. Former President Taft,
another great constitutional authority is also op
posed to prohibition, but bases his opposition upon
the wisdom and expediency of the measure rather
than upon its legal aspect. Mr. Beck in the
dry legislation serious, if not fatal impairment of
the principle of home rule-an invasion of the rights
reserved to the states at the adoption of scheme
| of government Our national Constitution is
posed of number of grants or waivers made by the
several states in favor of the general Federal Gov
ernment. All rights privileges which are not
enumerated therein reserved to the jurisdiction
| of the individual states and these are what are
called States Rights"
| AS Mr.. Beck puts it Nowhere in the Constitu-
tion is there the slightest trace of purpose on the
part of the fathers to determine questions of indi
vdua1 morality, and personal habit In country of
100O00;0o0 people it is, in my judgment,-a hazard
Gus experiment to impose, by rigid constitutional
justly offends the pride of individual liberty What
ever may be the merits of prohibition as a local
measure its adoption as an unbending national pri-
cple destroys the symmetry of the Constitution and
nvades those reserved rights of the states and of
the people thereof, which the tenth amendment was
designed to preserve invioate. l regard the adop-
ton of the eighteenth amendment as the destruc-
ton of the principle of home rule and such, the
deadest menace to the perpetuity OF the republic
that has arisen in the last half century,
| The points suggested by Mr.. Beck not to be
| lightly dismissed. They are based upon pro-
found analysis and experienced survey of the issue
in question They sufficiently important to en-
gage the careful consideration of our court of final
Jurisdiction and it is safe say that the opponents
of the amendment will not accept defeat until it has
been submitted to that tribunal for ultimate adjudi-
cation.
NEED OF A TEACHING AUTHORITY.
"It is interesting to find that from the first whilst
obectng to the Interpretation of the old teachers of
the Church and claiming that the plain text of Scrip
ture sufficient antidote and complete answer
to them and their traditional deductions the new
teachers found that without teaching and exposi-