The American issue. [volume] (Westerville, Ohio) 1912-19??, 1922-10-06


ILLINOIS. FIRST. THAT THEY
GO TO THE POLLS AND VOTE
ON NOVEMBER 9TH FOR DRY
CONGRESSMEN, MEMBERS OF
THE STATE LEGISLATURE
AND MEN FOR PUBLIC POSI-
TION HAVING 10 DO WITH
THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE
LAW WHO WILL KEEP THEIR
OATH OF OFFICE TO STAND
BY THE LAWS AND THE CON
STITuTION. SECOND, THAT
THEY DO NOT CONTRIBUTE
TO THE UNDERMINING OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE
UNITED STATES BY PARTIC-
1PAT1NG IN ANY MEASURE BY
VOTING ON THE SO-CALLED
BEER AND WINE QUESTION,
THAT THEY NOT ONLY DO NOT
PARTICIPATE. BUT THAT THE
CIVIC FORCES OF THE STATE
INTERESTED IN LAW AND
ORDER SHOW THE WET IN
TERESTS THAT THE MAJOR
ITY OF THE PEOPLE ARE NOT
IN SYMPATHY WITH THEIR
PROGRAM OF MULTIPLICATION
BY REFUSING TO PARTIC-
IPATE IN THE ELECTION SO
FAR AS THIS PROPOSITION IS
CONCERNED. AND THAT WE
MAKE AN AGGRESSIVE CAM
PAIGN URGING THE VOTERS
OF THE STATE NOT TO VOTE
AT ALL ON THIS PROPOSE
TION.
Vets Formerly Opposed Referendum
In this connection it might be well
to recall that the ant-saloon forces
of the State offered the vets an OPP
portunity to try out the beer and wine
proposal when there was no amend
ment to the Constitution forbidd;ng
such proposition. In 1917 when
the Legislature voted upon the
Bruce bill, House bill No. IA There
were seventy-eight vets in the House
in that session. Ftfty-two drys voted
for the elimination of whisky. There
were ffty-three votes on its behalf.
The one wet vote was cast by Mr..
Bruce himself. Now when the Con-
stitution of the United States forbids
all Intoxicating liquor including beer
and wine. they seek a chance on the
beer proposition.
Would Not Permit Vote When Legal
1t might also be well to remember
that in 1917 the same Ant-Saloon
forces offered referendum to the
vets giving an opportunity to vote the
State OF Illinois dry by House BILL No.
70. A majority of that legislature was
wet. Tom Curran, saloon-keeper and
wet leader of the House, called to-
gether the vets and told them it
would mean putting q paddock on the
door of every saloon in the State of
Illinois if the men and women alike
voted on this question, and so they
opposed this referendum and at time
when there was no constitutional pro-
vision that stood in the way Of such
a referendum. The anti-saloon forces
have offered legislation asking Nfor
referendum by counties, but have
always been refused by the brewers
and distillers who then controlled the
Illinois legislature. The vets refused
the vote in Chicago in 1910 after a
petition with 100000 names was sub
mitted.
Now Want Unconstitutional Vote
Now when the wet forces have been
outlawed by the State of Illinois and
by the Constitution of the United
States and by the Vostead Act, they
come asking for referendum that
will be contrary to the Eighteenth
Amendment to the Constitution. The
liquor interests could have enacted
the Initiative and Referendum, They
had il in their power to pass this
legislation in 1913, but refused to use
this power fearing that the State of
Illinois would vote them out of cx-
istence, then no. constitutional pro-
vision would have prevented. Now
we riqhtfully refuse to be partners in
breaking down the Constitutional
Amendment or contributing in any
way to lawlessness by participating in
vote on a proposition that is not
a question of public policy and that
will decide no question, but would
undermine the Constitution of the
United States.
Attorney Generals Statement
The opinion of the Attorney General
rs printed in the Chicago Tribune was
in part as follows:
1T is your duty" was the concu-
son of the chief law officer OF the
state, ito certify said question if the