The Bridgeport times and evening farmer., 1920-01-28
LIQUOR LAW IS SUBJECT TO VERY
 BITTER ATTACK
(Harvey's Weekly

While the amendment must be ac-
 cepted, and while the possibility of
 our ever getting rid of 1t is a matter
 of doubt a way of relief is open from
 some of the most odious features of
 the system which has been imposed
 upon us. It is to be observed that the
 amendment itself is very general in
 terms. It makes no attempt to define
 intoxicating liquors or to prescribe the
 manner in which its provisions shall
 be enforced. All such details. are left to legislation, to enact which Con gress and the several states shall have concurrent power." A law of Con-
 gress to that effect is now in exist ence, and, like the amendment itself, must be obeyed until 1t can be re- pealed or amended. But happily it is much easier to repeal or to amend a law than it is to deal with an ar ticle of the Constitution.
 And that law cries aloud to high
 heaven for repeal or radical amend
 ment. It's definition of Intoxicating liquors is an absurdity and a false hood. To declare that any beverage containing more than one-half of 1 per cent, of alcohol is intoxicating is simply grotesque. It is to put cider root beer, butterrni1lz, fruit juices and a large proportion of the drinks of soda fountains in the same category. It forbids the farmer to crush out a barrel of apple juice and let it turn to vinegar by natural processes. It forbids the housewife to simmer over a slow fire mixture of sassafras, dock root, sweet birch twigs and princes pine in a kettle of water, and let the stuff t'work itself clear" with l a little yeast; under a penalty of a term in prison.
 Equally monstrous are the restric- tions upon transporting intoxicating l liquors. A man who is subject to in- testinal disturbances for which black berry brandy is specific, is forbidden under penalty of fine and imprison- ment to carry flask of that medicine with him when he travels-the very time when he most needs 1t. A pl1y- | sician may think that his patient needs forty drops of whiskey three | time day and may prescribe it for 1 him, and the druggist may fill the prescription; and the man may take 1 it while he is at home; but he must 1 not carry the bottle to his office, so as to take a dose at noon, and, if he
 goes from home on a visit or busi- | ness trip, long or short, he must ] leave the bottle behind him and go ! without the medicine while he is l away.
 l Worst of all-if it be possible for 1 anything to be worse than these l according to those who are the most
 responsible for this measure, two of | the fundamental principles of our | jurisprudence, otherwise universal,
 are to be reversed. No longer is a man to be permitted to decline to answer question on the ground that 1 to do so might tend to incriminate 1 him; but he is to be compelled to tes- 1 tify against himself, or be punished d 1 for contempt of court. No longer, 1 either, is a man to be presumed inno-
 cent until he is proved guilty, the 1 burden of proof resting with the ac- l cuser; but he is to be regarded as i guilty until he himself proves his in- i nocence, he is to stand condemned on the strength of improved accu- sations. Such regulations, we sub- 1 init, are simply barbarous. They are l disgraceful to the legal code of any i civilized state.