Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1919-08-03
ENFORCEMENT ACT
DECLARED ILLEGAL
Elihu Root, Guthrie and Marbury
Give Opinion of Recent Dry
Legislation.
LAW HELD UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Say 1t Violates Article One,
Which Prohibits Passage of
Elk Post Facto Measures.
LAW HELD UNCONSTITUTIONAL
RY 4 cxrnciated pnns.

So.
WASHINGTON. August The war
time prohibition enforcement bill. re-
Gently passed by the House. and now
pending before Senate committee, is
unconstitutional. according to an opin-
ion By l;lihu Root. William d. Guthrie
and William L. Marbury. counsel for
the United States Brewers Associa-
ton. made public today.
The opnion holds that until the
iEhteenth amendment becomes effec-
, nins on IA. Jin,nna.Y l6 1870 Congress
tionni law, has no express power TO
prohibi, the manufacture and sale of
neer. whether or not Intoxicating"
There is now no valid reason for the
wartime prohibition act, the lawyers
declare. and there is no evidence. they
anu 70 support the claim that the
proposed enforcement measure is nee
eSsarE or proper to conserve the ma
tons food supply.
The opinion. an exhaustive document
ucdiins with all legal phases of the
question. was sent to Christian w
teiIenspan. president Of the brewers
a,asoci;-tion The lawyers contendcd
the New York Circuit Court OF Appeals
mad held the wartime act constitu-
tional, the decision would not apply
10 pending legislation.
Conditions Are Altered
'ConditionS." they said in This con-
hecloh; have meantime materially.
%hanged during the eigh, months since
passage, The President dccIarod pr on =
May 20 that ii seemed TO him entirely
SAFE TO remove the ban on wines and
aud resS TO the senate that the war had
ended last November; the demobiliza-
ION OF the army and navy is pro
pleted war necessity or emergency
has practically ceased TO exist and
personal and commercial relations with
r ,Gri1nny nnHe been permitted to be
Taking UP "a per cent beer. the
ai,tiornGys contend it has been. cstab-
beverage is not Intoxicating. and thai
II is immater that Congress for
is saTs taxed ,,o1 fermented liquors" con-
aic ns more or man ma qns;haif of per cent
solely for taxation purposes and quit
irrespective Of the intoxicating quality
Violates Article /.
=t.Jf. Therefore, according To itan-on
constructions" the opinion contInnes
,,t hs act Of Congress of November Fl
a aods no not prohibit the manufacture
PROPOSED enactment extending the pro-
m nioifiion to Misunderstanding liquors
na ouiu: as bo 10 transaction prior to its
tional and void. because violative Of
d me letter and the spirit of the man
stitution OF the United States. and that
no eN post facto law shall be passed BY
me amendment in the House Of see
lion OF the Nolstead bill by Inserting
me word hereafter before the word
cor construed f was probably for the pur-'
poSe OF avoiding this constitutional
point: but 1T would permit one con
Struct!on of the same term as 10 ACES
done prior to it's passage and a JifTnr
eht ana broader construction as 10 the
acts done afterwards. But the enact
menI tends 10 establish that the true
iies!slation beyond the scope of the eA-
!StInS cnactments."
Ihe committee decided to recon
mend an amendment to the House bill
which would permit the manufacture
OF mountaineering" wine and cider
lor nome use only. The House recently
refused TO change the bill in this re-
spect, and prohibition leaders an
nouhccd they would stand OUT 10 the
cnd against modification.