The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1916-1920, 1919-06-29
HOUSE HALTS DRY
ACTS UNTIL JULY 9
Recess Will Prevent Action
on Legislation.
Special DespdtcA TO THE Sun.

sp<ctH Despdfch TO THE Sun.
WASHINGTON, June 2s.-Postponement
OF prohibition legislation until after
July virtually was determined upon
by House leaders to-day when an
agreement was sought with the Senate
for recess OF one week from next
Monday providing all conference reports
on appropriation bills shall have been
agreed to by that time.
Majority Leader Mondell announced
that while no definite agreement had
ben reached with tho Senate, there was
no doubt that such an arrangement
could be made II the appropriation bills
and other legislation now In conference
or before the Senate could be prepared
Tor tho Presidents signature in time.
chairman Nolstead of the House Ju-
dietary Committee was still working on
the majority report on his bill tonight
and expected to have II ready for in
PRODUCTION Monday. The minority re-
por'. which Is being prepared by Rep
rt-oltative Steel fPa.), probably will
not be completed until shortly before
the House is ready to undertake con-
sideration OF prohibition legislation.
Chairman Campbell (Kan.) Of the
Rules Committee said that no rule had
been asked by the Judiciary Commit
tee for prohibition legislation, but as
the committee has authorized Chair
man Volstead to ask for a rule. this re-
quest probably will be forthcoming after
July ,. Basing his opposition TO the Vol:
stead bill on the incorporation of war
time and constitutional prohibition in
one measure, and upon the doubtful
constitutionality OF an attempt by Con-
gress through legislation to interpret the
Intoxicating liquors" phrase in the
Eighteenth Amendment. Representative
Dyer (ho.), a Republican member OF
the Judiciary COMMITTEES, to-day framed
and made public a memorandum pre-
pared for the minority report of the Ju-
dietary Committee.
After declaring that regardless Of
action by the President war time proni-
bition has been nullined by the end OF
tho war Mr.. Dyer offers the following
discussion OF the second pont--the con-
stitutionality OF Congress- seeking to in
terpret by legislation Constitutional
amendment The memorandum reads:
1T contend that Congress has no au-
thority to say that every beverage CON-
tanning one-half OF per centum or more
OF alcohol by volume Is Intoxicating.
Every sensible person knows that that Is
not fact. The Constitutional amend
mont concerns the manufacture, sale or
transportation OF intoxicating liquors,
and It gives to Congress and the several
States concurrent power to enforce this
article by appropriate legislation.
Under this amendment Congress has
the right to make laws enforcing the
amendment but Congress has no right
to interpret any Of its provisions. The
right TO interpret rests with tho courts.
OF course Congress has a right TO define
Its own acts but the prohibition amend
ment Is not an act OF Congress- Con-
gress merely submitted the matter TO the
States. The amendment is now a part
OF the basic law from which Congress
itself obtains Its power The majority
of the members of the Judiciary Commit
tee OF tho House concluded they had
authority to interpret the word 'intox-
icating" on the ground that the consti-
tutional amendment for national pro-
hibition was an act OF Congress. but
constitutional amendments are not acts
OF Congress.
Congress merely submits the amend
ments to the States and when three
fourths OF the States ratify the amend
ment II becomes a law OF the land and
is not in any way the same thing as a
law passed In the usual way by the
Congress. l think therefore that in the
regulations pertaining to the constitu-
tional amendment intoxicating liquors
cannot be legally defined by Congress,
but must be left to the courts, and that