The daily times., 1921-08-23
stanley AMENDMENT
ihe Usual Unanimous Passage
OF Prohibition Measures Was
Halted When the Question
of the Searching of a Mans
Home Without a Warrant
Came Before the Senate.
(By David Lawrence)
Copyright, 1921, by The Daily

Times)
Washington, Aug 22-The re-
action against prohibition-or rather
the extremes to which its advocates
nave gone in attempting to enforce
their ideas-has come at last. Con-
gress stands today divided as il never
mas been before on the issue of
whether a mans home is protected
by the Constitution of the United
States against search without legal
warrant
Those who have been standing on
the side-lines and predicting that
sooner or later public sentiment
would react against the extreme pro-
hlbltlonists are saying that the in
evitable has happened For the first
time in years members of Congress-
who have voted dry every time the
Antl-Saloon league puts its approval
or disapproval on a liquor measure
now are standing with the liberal
element as against the Anti-SaIoon
Leagues proposals.
Up to now there has been no re-
fuge for the man in Congress who
felt that the prohibitionists were GO
ing too far. He has had to vote dry
or be branded a wet" But the
search and seizure controversy has
changed the whole character of the
The question now is not
whether liquor shall be manufactured
and sold. The federal constitution
prohibits that and gives Congress the
right to fix the amount of alcohol in
beverages. But the reaction is against
the severity of the Volstead act
which dealt with the enforcement of
the Constitution.
Shall mans own home, his auto
mobile, his suitcase, his hotel room
be searched without warrant? Shall
a warrant be issued unless there is
sworn proof that the individual is
actually engaged in the sale of Ii
quor? If the Stanley amendment
which was passed unanimously by
the Senate goes through finally pro-
officers will have to present
proof before they can get a warrant
from judge. The prohibition advo- /,
Gates say this will dampen the en-
thnsiasm of enforcement officers and |
give bootIeggers free hand The
other side insists that the constitu-
ion protects a citizen against search
without warrant and that one part of
he constitution is just as sacred as
oy the Anti-Saloon league against the /
Stanley amendment is proof indeed
# the seriousness with which the pro-
,osal is regarded. Some have gone so
tead act almost impossible of en-
orcement SO far as individuals are
oncerned. Others on the opposite
ide say that would be a good thing
or they claim the people of America
My intended in the first place to
bolish the saloon and distillery and
idn't intend to interfere with home
rewing or other personal liberties in I
ones household goods {
rom place to place. !,
There has always been good deal
f political embarrassment about the
question. Many men who
re liberal at heart have voted dry
nd many who have voted wet"
ave themselves been tetetalers. The
League by sEsndid or |
anization has managed to crack the e
hip over congress by taking advan- t
ige of public sentiment against the b
aloon and other abuses. That same +
,rength enabled the Anti-Saloon i
eague to put through the Volstead c
Increment act. But the reaction in
shtiment which has developed since
lat law was put upon the statute t
CONTINUED on page 81 n