The American issue. [volume] (Westerville, Ohio) 1912-19??, 1922-09-22
Shows Big Majority Really
For Dry Law
MODIFICATION VOTERS
FAVOR PROHIBITION
Permitting Intoxicants Would NulIfy
Constitution
BEER BALLOT PRINCIPLE APPLIES

The great majority in the Literary
Digest poll favor Prohibition, according
to VIM. Jennings Bryan. In letter tc
the Digest he analyzed the vote ant
pointed out why voters for modification
could not be reasonably counted against
enforcement OF the Eighteenth Amend
ment. Mr.. Bryan's letter is of particu
lar interest because his reasoning ap
plies to the questions proposed to be
placed on the ballot in Illinois through
the filling of the beer petition Mr.
Bryan's letter reads as follows:
1.-The poll which the Literary Digest is
making is not only entirely legitimate
and fairly conducted. but it is rare
illustration of journalistic enterprise
1t will naturally have influence on pub.
lice sentiment, and just as naturally
those for and those against Prohibition
will differ as to the degree of accuracy
which shall be accredited to the poll
Nothing except ballots cast by ALL the
voters can give the exact sentiment, and
of course, that is impossible without an
election. The straw vote varies in
value in proportion as it reflects or fails
to reflect public sentiment as it actually
is, and that is matter OF opinion and
can not be proven. A poll of 1000, 900
votes out OF 10000. 900 voters leaves
large room for speculation.
My comment upon the poll would be
that the third question is the only one
which brings out an answer which ex-
presses an unqualified opinion. When a
person votes in favor of REPEATING
the amendment, there can be no doubt
about what he means, and this vote
seems to be the smallest, both among
the women voters and in the general
poll. Roughly speaking, about one-fifth
vote for repeal, and it is fair to assume
that everyone who cast such vote is
unqualifiedly in favor of the repeal oil
the amendment
"The second question is a wide.open
one. 1t is so wide-open that it is i'm
possible for anyone to guess the views
OF any person who votes yes upon it..
The word modification is very broad
word. What kind of modification do
those believe in who favor modification !?
1t may be a modification in manner or
method OF enforcement without any
change in the alcoholic content.
Those who seek to bring back wine
and beer usually ask for an alcoholic
content in both wine and beer which
would make them intoxicating, and yet
no such law is possible while the amend.
ment remains in the Constitution. The
Supreme Court would be compelled to
nullify any law that permitted enough
alcohol to intoXicate, because the amend
ment prohibits the manufacture or sale
of intoxicating beverages. Shall we as.
sumo that people who are opposed to the
amendment are in favor of modifca.
tion that would permit the manufacture
and sale of intoxicating beveragesg One
who opposes repeal and yet favors mod
ifcation must be very confused in his
mind and in his reasoning if he favors
modification that would violate the
amendment. If he can assume that those
who vote in favor of modification are
against the repeal of the amendment, we
must assume that they favor only such
modification as is permissible under the
amendment, and the only modification
permissible would be a law increasing
the alcoholic content from one.h of
l per cent to per cent a little higher,
but not high enough to be Intoxicating.
is 1t likely that any large number of per.
sons would make serious effort to get
a little more alcohol in a non.intoxicat.
ing drink? If they can not get bev.
erage that will intoxicate, why do they
want any more alcohol than they can
get now? 1t seems to me that the un.
certainty as to the meaning of the sec.
ond question makes the answer to that
question of little value. Those in favor
of Prohibition will, naturally assume
that all who vote for mobilization favor
modification that will not violate the
amendment, and can, therefore, be