Richmond daily register. (Richmond, Madison County, Ky.) 1917-1978, 1920-06-07
FEDERAL. AMENDMENT AND
ENFORCEMENT ACT ARE
BOTH SUSTAINED IN
OPINION TODAY
(By Associated Press)

Washington, June Both the
federal prohibition amendments
and enforcement act were held
constitutional today by the ST.
.pTcme Court, which dismissed pc
titions to have federal officials en-
Joined from enforcing prohibition
in Rhode Island and New Jersey,
dissolved the injunction restrain
ing the Wisconsin officials from
interfering iii the manufacture of
beer containing more than half of
one per cent of alcohol, and up
held the contentious of the gov
iernment in the cases brought by
Christian Feigenspan, Newark
brewer, the ST. Louis Brewing
Association, the Kentucky Disti1-
ilcrics and Warehouse Company.
and George Dempsey, a Boston
wholesale liquor dealer.
The opinion was rendered by
Associate Justice Vandevanter.
Validity of the Prohibition Amend
ment ard portions of the Enforcement
Act was involved in seven separate
proceedings before the Supreme Court
Two of these -yere original suits
brought by Rhone Island and New Jer-
sey, a:5 sovereign states to enjoin en-
forcenent in their jurisdictions upon
the grounds thai 10th enactments were
unconstitutional The other cases We're
direct appeals fiom lower court de-
crees.
! Steps to institute the suits were ta-
| ken IinTnueiateIy after the amendment
= a" effective Ia~'Iary 16 and on
motion of counsel their consideration
/ In both the Rhode Island and New
teenth Amendment was attached, but
the New Jersey case also alleged that
even il the amednment were valid, the
enforcement act was unconstitutional
| because it had not been concurred in
| by New Jersey under provisions of the
amendment giving the federal and
TO enforce prohibition. New jersey
/ also contended that if the entire en-
! fOrcement act We're not demonstrations
tai, the portion OF it limiting the alco-
4 hcHcs con tent of beverages to less than
one half of one per cent and relating
) 10 the dispensing u liquors for medi-
| cin2i purposes ere invalid.
The cases reaching the court on ap-
! peas were those of the Kentucky Dis
IstiHeries and Warehouse Company;
Christian i'eigenspan, a Newark, n. j.,
q, brewer, the st. Louis Brewing Com
pany, and George c. Dempsey, whole
sale liquor dealer of Boston, Mass: who
lost INDUCTION proceedings in the lower
court. The other case before the court
was an appeal by the government from
a decision of Federal Judge Geiger.
enjoining federal officials from inter
ferinG with the Manitowoc Products
Company Wisconsin corporation. in
1.-THE manufacture of been containing
L2.5 percent alcohol.
In all the cases a general attack on
the amendment was made on ground
that it was revolutionary and consti
ted legislation in the guise of a con
5 stitutional amendment designed to
regulate the private habits of individ-
uals that it interfered with the states
. police powers: that it was invalid be-
cause adopted by two-thrds of the
members of Congress present when the
vote was taken and not two-thirds ot
the membership and that the amend
ment was not ratified by three -fourths
of the states owing to provisions in
many state constitutions requiring
= that amendments be submitted to q
referendum