New-York tribune., 1919-07-01

gested bad faith The submission oi
the amendment did not relieve Con-
gress of its duty to legislato .'r de-
prive it Of any authority over the sub
lect. This charge, stripped OF it's base
less accusation against Congress, is
simply a plea that the saloon should
have n year in which 70 unload on the
public its stock Of liquors. com
modify that the nation with singular
Unanimity has branded as inimical to
its welfare"
After calling attention to arguments
that Congress has no power to define
Intoxicating liquors., the report said:
This suggestion does not appear to
raise any real difficulty. Congress is
given power TO enforce this amend
ment by appropriate legislation; to do
that it must necessarily determine ts
scope and meaning. The right to de-
fine the power conferred upon it By
the Constitution has been exercised by
mont. Every act that it passes is in
effect an assertion that the Consttu-
ton conters power to pass ii and is
construction of its terms"
Same Power as Court
The report held that Congress has
the same power as court in determin-
ing what is meant by the phrase "in-
toxicating liquors." by comparing it
with prior legislation and taking notice
OF the purpose in passing the legisa-
ton
ut is a part OF the history of this
country that for many years a bitter
and persistent struggle has been going
on against the liquor traffic" it con-
tinues. This amendment is the cul-
mination Of that struggle. Many state:
have passed constitutional amendments
to accomplish locally the same objec
they are all substantially in the same
language as this one. The legislatures
Of these states, more than thirty in
mum der, have passed statutes TO carry
these amendments into effect and they
have all, without exception, defined
the meaning of this phrase 'intoxicat-
ing liquors as all spirituous, vinous,
malt and fermented liquors, or all
such liquors that contain one-h half Of
one per cent or more Of alcohol"
1t is argued that whether any liquor
is Intoxicating or not depends upon
the person drinking it.
lntoxication Question Of Fact
"To define what is Intoxicating does
not tlespass on the providence Of the
court. No court can say. as n matter
oi ld", WlldO percentage Ol hiNOnoi III
liquor makes it intoxicating, nor what
toxic effect is intoxication," the report
asserts. These are questions of fact
and not law, and, as such, are clearly
within the province of Congress. An
equal quantity of the same liquor may
make one person dead drunk and but
slightly affect another. AS some con-
tend, there may be persons who have
become SO tolerant Of alcohol that trey
cannot get drunk on beer containing
2s4 per cent of alcohol by weight,
which, by the way contains only one
half Of per cent of alcohol less than
the ordinary beer. But We arc not
egislating for a special class. This
amendment was intended to apply gen
orally and to prevent the sale Of any
liquor that will make anybody drunk.
1T Is not only intoxlcation that this
amendment seeks to prohibit but the
useless waste as we'll Of tho uncountcd
millions in money that should 70 to
provide Injuries, comforts and CON
venicnccs in the homc'
The concluding paragraph reads:
"Title 2 for the enforcement Of the
Eighteenth Amendment has in it no
new or experimental features. Every
provision in it has prccedcnts in state
or Federal legislation. Many states
have provisions in their laws that are
much more drastic than any contained
in this bill The aim Of the committee
has been to present a measure that
would if enacted into law carry into
effect in good faith the purpose Of this
amendment, and would not present any
feature to which any law abiding citi-
zen could reasonably object"