The Birmingham age-herald., 1920-03-31
END ARGUMENTS ON .CONST|TUTIONALITY
 OF PROHIBITION ACTS
Final Arguments Before Supreme Court on Ap- peals Brought By New
 ark Brewer
By Assoclaisa Prss.

Washington, March so---lrglments 30 on the eonstitutionality of the prohibition amendment and portions of the enf0rec- ment act were concluded today in the supreme court
 Seven separate proceedings now rect with the court for determination.
 The arguments today were on appeals brought by Christian Fedgenspan of New ark, N J., from federal court decrees dis missing injunction proceedings to enjoin prohibition officials from preventing him from manufacturing beer containing more than one-half of 1 per cent alcohol, and on government appeals from Judgments restraining officials from interfering with the Manitowoc Products Company, a Wisconsin concern, in the manufacture Of beer containing 2,o per cent alcohol by volume.
 William D. Guthrie, appearing in the former, contended that by the words "concurrent power to enforce. Congress
 intended for the federal government and the state to enforce prohibition with iden- tical legislation, and that the states were to give their approval to epforce- ment Legislation before becoming effec- tive.
 we submit that the state legislatures must have understood that the amends nent provided for concurrent enforcement as the amendment states Mr Guthrie said 'The construction now urged by tue government would result in practically the complete loss of state control.
 If this point were between individuals we mght well call it point of fair con duct and morality"
 Yelled charges that evidences were be-
 ing "manufartared" by prohibition sup pcrters to influence the court in connec' ton with it's consideration of the prohi- bition question were made by MT Guthrie He called attention to "an extension or .1a4f- thor of the enforcement act appearing
 in the Congressional Record last week, giving what was in the minds Of mem- bers of the House judiciary committee in 1917 while framing the prohibition amend ment These views, he said. conflict SC with other statements made by various members of both houses in connection with the amendment
 MT. Guthrie also referred to letters written by senators possibly for the Anti-Saloon League and expressing what they now think they then thought. Ralph W. Jac1rnan representing the Manitowoc Products Company took the position that by concurrent power Con- gress intended that the federal enforce n,ent act was to be supreme until state had enacted enforcement legislation when the latter was to have complete control in enforcing prohibition within its borders He also defended the validity of the Mul- berger AcE pernitttlHE tift istitt etetut 2 ttt Wisconsin of Nbeer containing ~ per cent alcohol, which he co.itended was not in toxicatng.
 When Wisconsin ratified the prohibi- tion amendment he said, 't had no idea that it was to be prohibited from en- acting legislation rela tive to non-intoxf- eating beverages
 Replying to MT. Jackson. Solicitor Gen eral King argued that were that theory yf-Concurrent power true then the states would have exclusive power, adding that in his opinion the term meath that both Congress and the states were given au- thority to enact legislation for the en- forcement of prohibition, but neither had power to stand in the others way re- garding enforcement Assistant Attorney General Fsrierson contended that the su- preme courts recent opinion in appeals brought ey Jacob Ruppert the New York brewer, sustaining CO igress' au- thority under it's war powers to prescribe the maximum alcoholic content of bever- ages. virtually settled the validity of that provision.