The Morning Tulsa daily world. [volume] (Tulsa, Okla.) 1919-1927, 1921-10-09

I. y y. start Correspondent.
ASlIINGTON-- --RcpuhlicRn and
democratic senators who have
wHgod long and determined fight
against the "anti-boer bin declare
they viii be entisfcd n they only
- succeed In liking public attention
upon he fourth amendment TO the
United States constitution
When they started their fight
against indiscriminntc search and
seizure by prohibition agents they
were aware they faced Ovcrwhelm-
ing odds In the dry" majority OF
congress. which has seldom failed 20
heed the demands Of the Hnti-saloou
ieuBue fot the tightening g; rreh!h!
tion restrictions about the Amcri-
can people.
Amendment Stiii Alive.
But their real purpose, they say
was to begin an agitation that would
remind the American people that
there Ia such a thing as the fourth
amendment still In existence, de-
spite the fact that even long before
these Volstead days it was fire.
quently ignored In prohibition en-
forcement in "dry" estates and com
munlties.
Senator Sterling RD, OF South
Dakota, and other dry leaders OF
congress contend there II nothing In
the search and seizure provision
they have written into ;ho anli-becr
bill which Is In conflict with the
spirit or the letter Of tho fourth
amendment. Their opponents argue
otherwise, and the controversy will
doubtless end in the courta, as
many disputes over prohibition en-
forcomCnts invariably do.
Tho stanley amendment, Hpon-
Rorcd by Senator stanley tD), OF
kentucky and adopted by tho SEN
Rtc unanimously even Senator Stor-
ling agreeing to accept n. was cN-
pected 90 prevent indiscrimiuato
"raids' upon IN, home and per
sonai property by the prohibition
"poHcc," unless they could chow
'protahlc cause or wcTC armed
with warrants II was merely in
tended to bind them strictly tu the
restrictions Dluar'. Imposed upon
search ana seizure by tho fourth
amendment
DrSs Hard to Please,
But tho dry" forcrg rose up
against the sunatc's unanimous uc-
tion and demanded the rejection Of
the Stanley amendment when the
anti-beer bin was sent 20 confer
encc, Even a substitute amendment
proposed hy Representative Nolstopd
(RD. Of Minnesota. whose name th,
prohibition enforcement act bears
which was adopted by the house hN
a decisive vote OF 100 TO 90, didu
suit the "hOne-drys.'
Wayne H. Miller general counsel
for the Antl-Saloon league, even
found himself in tho uncomfortable
position ~ being bitterly criticized
by some OF the extremists" In hts
own organization for permitting the
house 20 adopt NOlRicad's amend
ment. NOlsteld was himself ass1lled
on the house floor by some dry"
spokcsmcn for fathcrinE PROPOSE
tion which they admitted would
by it's Limitation OF search and SELF
ure, probably permit home brew not
intended for sale
Extremely dry" house members
Clamorcd for authorization OF prohi-
bi,iU0 agents TO- turn tho home inside
out and 20 prevent a drop ~ alco-
hollc liquor from being made or used
within it Representative Fields
tDD, OF Kentucky, an ayOwCd
"bone-dry" sought 90 limit the pro-
lection of the homo boy causing the
manufacture OF liquor TO bee made
sufficient reason for the issuance of
a search warrant against a dwoll-
ing regardless or the question ut
intent 10 sell Fields proposal was
beaten 10y vote of 90 10 EA
Thcn wheeler spok kosman and
lobbyist Tor the Anu-s3loon Icagua.
slipped into the room in which tho
senate and house conferees were
meeting Whereupon senator Ash
urst (D). Of Arizona. one OF tho sen o.
ate Conferees, "holtcd" the confer.
ence with this declaration that he
would agree to the Stanley amend %
nent or nothing His departure lot
,he "bone-drys" in control OF tbo
conference and they promptly tossed
both the senate and and house
smendments into the nearest waste
hosket and, with Whcelor's assist
ance wrote the following bone
49, subetitute FOR them
i'Section G.. Thot any officer
cent or employe OF the unite
ssVns sneaged in the enforcement a
shis s,G,' sot or the national prohinitio