The evening herald. (Klamath Falls, Or.) 1906-1942, 1919-02-27
THURSDAY. FEBRUARY -, ,si.
HAVE WE PROHIBITIONS

The following from Harvey's Week
ly will throw some light on the con
troversy now starting throughout the
nation and which promises to in
crease In vehemence as the time ap
proaches for the enforcement of the
constitutional amendment placing
the country in the dry column
The New York Sun, an advocate
of prohibition, lays its finger on a
weakness In the recently ratified pro-
hibition amendment to the Constitu-
tion which promises amendment to
the Constitution which promises in
definite delay In giving vitality to
the measure. even if it does not re-
suit i'm its ultimate defeat.
The joint Congressional resolution
just endorsed by the Legislators of
forty States, four more than neces.
sary, as Constitutional amendment,
makes no provision for enforcement
THAT must be provided by other le-
designating the legislators who are
to enact these enforcement laws. This
vital question Is left in state of
such confusion that the temptation
is strong to regard as deliberate the
actual inaptitude in that respect of
the Joint Resolution as it was passed
by both houses of Congress. The en-
forcement clause of the Resolution
as it went to the States for their rat
ification. and was by forty of them
80 ratified is as follows:
The Congress and the several
to enforce this Article by appropriate
legislation.
Concurrent action between the
House and Senate of Congress and
between the Houses and Senates of
the several States is understandable
1t means entire agreement on every
detail of any measure introduced. 1t
means that House and Senate must
separately pass identically the same
bill. But how Is this concurrence
between the Federal Congress and
the Legislatures of the several States
to be established? Is an enforcement
act passed by both branches of Con-
gress to go from Congress. as an Up
per House to forty-eight State Legis.
latures. as Lower House for con-
currence? And suppose all these
forty-eight Legislatures do not act
as one. but as fOrty-eight? Suppose
each one of them enacts an enforce
ment law different from all the 9TH
ers. and none of them in agreement
with the Federal law? That is not be-
yond the bounds of possibility, even
II 1t Is more improbable than that
only State here and there fails to
approve the Federal measure. In
either case there would be failure OF
Congress and the several States to
concur" and without that concur
renee in methods of enforcement
there would be failure of power to
enforce. for power to enforce is con-
ferred by the Joint Resolution on the
specific condition of concurrence.
II an enforcement act passed by the
Federal Congress went to each of the
.everal States for concurrence. might
1 not by each of them be sent back ,
o Congress with amendments to be ,
discussed and debated, tossed back /
md forth from Federal House to
federal Senate, until accepted or de.
eated as the case might be? In that
went there might be amendments
rom each OF the forty-eight States
O be thus disposed of, and each of
he forty-eight States might make
lot one. but dozen, amendments.
ach one to go thru Congress on its
wn merits in the usual routine OF
rocedure. In such case, were we
wing In the days of Methusaleh,
ome OF US might possibly survive
,ng enough to see the Prohibition
.mendmeut enforced. But 1t would
. rash to wager even on that
Exploring the bewildering perplex-
les Of the question along other
mes. the sun asks:
Does IL mean that II Washington