Maryland independent. [volume] (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1874-current, 1920-06-11
SUPREME COURT
UPHOLDS DRY Law
State Laws Protecting Beer
and wine are Void
A UNANIMOUS OPINION
inJunetions Restraining Federal Agents
From Enforcing The Act Are
Swept Aside--chief JUS
tlee Whites Remarks.

tlee Whites Remarks.
Washington. The prohibition
amendment and the enforcement act
were held constitutional by the Su-
preme Court Monday in a unanimous
decision.
While attorneys for the interests at
tacking the two measures were grant
ed permission to file motions for re-
hearings. the decision was regarded
generally as striking a death blow to
the hopes Of the vets.
The courts opinion, rendered by
Justice Van de venter, was sweep
ing. It held that the amendment not
only came within the amending power
conferred by the Federal Constitution,
but was lawfully proposed, and now is
the law OF the land While reoogniz-
ing that Congress has limitations in re-
spect to the enforcement Of laws re-
garding beverages, the court held
those limits were not transcribed in
the enactment of the enforcement act
restricting alcoholic content OF intoxi
cants to one-half of l per cent.
While the New York, New Jersey
and Wisconsin acts, permitting the
manufacture and sale Of beverages of
more than one-half of per cent. nulli-
fed alcoholic content, were not direct
| ly involved, the decision was inter
| preted as invalidating them. The
court said the first section Of the
amendment, Of its own force, '3nvali-
dates any legislative act, whether by
Congress. by a state legislature or by
q territorial assembly. which author
lies or sanctions what the section pro
hibits"
Concurrent power granted by the
amendment to federal and state gov
ernments to enforce prohibition, the
court further held, does not enable
Congress or the several states TO de-
feat or thwart prohibition, but only
to enforce 1t by appropriate means +"
The decision of the court was set
forth In IL conclusions, covering
seven separate proceedings. These pro
ceedings included original suits
brought by the state of RhoG,s Island,
directly attacking the constitutionality
OF the amendment.
The Conclusions.
The conclusions Of the court follow:
1.-THE adoption by both houses of
Congress each by twothirds vote.
Of a joint resolution proposing an
amendment to the Constitution sufi-
ciently shows that the proposal was
deemed necessary by all who voted for
It. An express declaration that they
regarded It as necessary is not essen
tial None Of the resolutions whereby
prior amendments were proposed con-
tanned such declaration.
"2-The two-thirds vote in each
House which is required in proposing
an amendment is a vote Of two-thirds
OF the members misunderstanding
the presence Of a Quorum-and not a
vote Of twothirds of the entire mem
bership present and absent Missouri
Pacific Railway Company VS.. Kansas
24s, u s. 276.
The Referendum.
"3-The referendum provisions of
state constitutions and statutes, can
not be applied, consistently with the
Constitution of the United States, In
the ratification or rejection of
..-A,-aufs - - Iaurlye We C,,,ttb
u. S.-decided June l, 1920.
"4-The prohibition Of the manu-
facture, sale, transportation, impor-
tation and expectation of intoxicating
liquors for beverage purposes, as
embodied in the Eighteenth Amend
ment, is within the power to amend
reserved by Article V of the Consti-
tuition.
"5-That amendment by lawful
proposal and ratification has become
a part Of the constitution and must
be respected and given effect the
same as other provisions of that in
strument
Binding On All.
"S-The first section of the amend
ment-the one embodying the prohi.
tion-is operative throughout the en-
tire territorial limits of the United
States, binds all legislative bodies.
courts, public officers and individuals
within those limits, and of its own
force invalidates any legislative act
whether by Congress. by state legis.
lature, or by a territorial assembly
which authorizes or sanctions what
the section prohibits.
1.-THE second section Of the
amendment-the one declaring the
Congress and the several states shall
have concurrent power to enforce
this article by appropriate legisla-
tion'-does not enable Congress or
the several states to defeat or thwart
the prohibition, but only to enforce
It by appropriate means.
Concurrent Power.
"s-The words concurrent power
in that section do not mean joint
power, or require that legislation
Hereunder by Congress, to be effect.
i've, shall be approved or sanctioned