The Birmingham age-herald., 1919-03-29

plantation of an innocent owner would be subject to confiscation because q tenant had set up a still on the land.
 & You say some of the most ardent prohibitionists are feeling the effect of the "very foolish laws" You do not state what complaint they are making of the operations of the laws, and for my part. although I have talk ed with large numbers of ardent pro- hibitionists in regard to the prohibition laws and they have talked to me about them. have not heard a single word of complaint from any ardent prohibitionist in respect to them. nor have I heard from anyone that he is feeling the effects of the laws in any unsatisfactory way.
 4. Referring to the act of 1919 (bone dry 1ar=l. you say that Under this law any property on or in which liquor s found must be eonfiscated by tbe state After a careful examination of all the prohibition laws of the state I am not able to find any such provis- ion as this in any one of them, and am willing to affirm most em- phatically that no such provision oc- CUTS nthe laws, either in the act oe 1919 or any preceding law. If I had unlimited space I would quote the very words of the provision of the Id WI Ol Nlle SuL-1~I or conllSCatlOH. and thus show the error of your asser- tion in the dictum above quoted An attempt has been made in some quar- ters to create the impression that the last prohibition law in Alabama is something novel and goes far beyond tho nrohibit;on law of any other state
 This is an error. In Arkansas the sale of prohibited liquors is felony. punish able by imprisonment in the penitentiary 10 tato of nessee, Arkansas and many western states had passed bone-dry bills that prohibit the receipt or possession of any prohibited liquors whatever, long before the Alabama law was enacted. In fact the supreme court of the United States more than year ago sustained the validity of such a statute enacted iH Idaho in 1915. The prohibition laws of ali the states provide for confiscation in con- nection with the enforcement of such laws against dealing in liquors and the acts of Congress abound in such provi sions.' In point of fact, the languare of section 12 of the Alabama law of 1919 as to the confiscation of the illegal plant together with the buildings and lots or parcels of ground constituting the prerp- ises on which the unlawful act is DOT formed" was taken word for word from the act of Congress Of June ', 1906.
 You TeIer III the aTI'Cle to certain Ill., discreet and it may be illegal. acts of officers in regard to searches constitut ing an abuse of their authority which no one would approve. and no one would justify. But the laws are not responsible for these abuses, and officers committing them are responsible civilly and crini- nally to the persons whose right they infringe, and adequate remedies are avail able to secure the enforcement of those rights. The prohibition laws of the state carefully guard all constitutional rights of the citizen, else they would have been declared invalid by the supreme court. It is well known that all important pro- visions of these laws prior to 1919 have been assailed as being unconstitutiona yet not in a single instance has the at tack succeeded, but in each case the su- preme court has upheld the provisions in question as valid.
 Whether the Alabama prohibition laws "are very foolish and impractical or whether the writer of those laws is all ''impracticable attorney" he is willing to leave to the decision of impartial persons who know what the laws were intended to accomplish and what they have ac- complished. Not even Ned Brace, l think, would claim that the antl-adFertlslhS law, which has been copied in many states. was an impra ctical piece of 1egis- lation, or that it has failed in its purpose, since it has banished liquor advertisine from every billboard and. newspaper 1h Alabama. Furthermore, the federal law excluding liquor advertising in all forms from the United States mails when ad- dressed into dry territory, has banished such advertising from every newspaper and magazine in the United States. Fms denial of publicity to mail order liquor houses was a fatal blow to them, and marked an important victory over the H. quor traffic in the march to national pro- hibition
 Trusting you will publish this com munication for the information Of the public in respect to matters that are now arousing public interest, beg to re- main, Yours very truly,
 SAMUEL D. WEAKLEY. Birmingham. March 27, 1913.