Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1920-01-16

clinched the argument for 4hotinence n
the business and commercial world.
1.-THE anti liquor war in the United
States began in 16i2 when the Mary
land Colony passed law Furnishing
drunkenness by a fine Of 100 pounds 81
tobacco. The long and uphill Tight il
endef Ohio 10 the only state that has
in its constitution . provision that the
legislature must submit to referen-
dunn ratification o. any amendment to
the federal constitution. Even II the
vets win in Ohio that will not affect
the other states. In two Of which the
supreme courts have decided against
referendum"
Asked as to ho.. the prohibitionists
succeeded in getting New York state.
one of the wettest commonwealth in
the union, into the dry" column. Mr..
Anderson said the miracle was accom-
plished unwittingly. by the liquor inte:.
ests and Tammanv." He went on:
"Tammany put into its platform in
1918 an anti-prohibition plank and tried
to carry the legislature. The Republic
can candidates. generally. declared for
ratification and were elected. Because
Tammany had made 1t q party mat.
ter the Republica . did likewise. Tam
many chief" was interested In electing
a governor and did elect governor. but
the 'drys' won the legislature because
they knew ratification would be up IL
the Assembly and Senate and that it
would not 60 to the governor for sig
nature. The election gave US four
fifths Of the representatives in both
houses committed to prohibition. We
simply beat the Tammany vets at
their own game. Two-thirds Of New
York state already was dry by local
option"
Two main points of attack upon
the 18th or prohibition amendment
still remain to be made by the anti
prohibition forces according to Hugh
Fox, secretary of the United States
Brewers Association here. The
United States supreme court. he
says, will adjudicate them. They
are: First, whether Congress has tn ,
right to define an Intoxicating bev .
GRACE" and. second. a decision as to
the scope and meaning of the pro-
vision that Congress and the sew
eral states shall hace concurrent
power to pass appropriate legisla
ton for enforcement.
IF the supreme court" he said.
SHOULD finally uphold the right of
Congress to establish a definition of
one-half of one per cent for the pur-
pose of enforcing national prohibi-
ton, and that the states have no
power in the matter. the effect would
be to put cider and many so-calleti
soft drinks" under the ban.
meanwhile" said Mr.. Fox. "the
enforcement measure. which is now
known as the National Prohibition
act. will, If sustained by the courts.
deprive accused persons of a trial By
jury, and make them prove their in
nocence. No physician will be able
to prescribe alcohol in any form
without submitting to lvexatious
regulations which will take so much
time and trouble that a busy doctor
could not afford to be bothered with
them.
Mr.. Fox predicted that regulations
to carry out the provisions of the
act would prohibit the selling OF ap-
planes for home brewing or distil.
ling, and that "it is even doubtful II
the farmer will be able to turn his
own apples into cider. his own grapes
into wine or his small fruits INTO cor
dals"
Mr.. Fox contended that the Fed
era amendment specifically prohibits
Intoxicating beverages. and this
was ratified by the states with the
understanding that it meant intoxi-
eating liquors and nothing else.
whether the amendment can now
be enlarged and extended by Con-
gress under the guise Of a definition,
is one of the issues which will have
to be adjudicated by the supreme
court" he said. together with the
scope and meaning Of the provision
that the Congress and the several
states shall have concurrent power
to pass appropriate legislation for
the enforcement of national prohibi.
tion."
Mr.. Fox paid his respects to the
Antt-Saloon League, declaring that
''in opposing every attempt Of the
people to vote on the question Of pro-
hib:tion," it had completely revers-