The Nevada County picayune., 1922-04-20

Thus e.@4 ;Le law which the sorer- eig- country of Iceland must pass
 mus. first have the Spanish O. K.
 Tine threat of Spain is an economic one. II demands that Spanish wines te accepted in Iceland the alternative te.a- that spain will refuse to accept Icclauds fish shipments Thus a peo- ple yn0 had adopted q governmental policy by which they chose to live are being starved into subm ssion To the tradcspeopIe of another nation.
 "Ir does not I-erely matter that the quesfio involved is one of the prohi- i bition Of the liquor traffic Any other ] fnorai. political or economic issue might have been involved It is sig nificant that Spain jumped on little i island country. of less than 100000 population. the inference beng that she chose such q country because of it's snallness of size and influence But what Spain has done 10 Iceland Spain. France and Portugal. all wine producing aaticns, are al:o attempting 10 do 10 Norway, where the people have voted for prohibition and where parliamentary action putting fl into effect = LOW being held by reason Of the economic threats of these three countries Finland and Poland, which are dry and small. also are threat ened.
 "Is il not entirely probable that Span and other wine producing coun- tries would seek to secure the repeal of prohibition i'll the United States but for the fact that this country is so large and powerful: Who knows what organized attempts on the part of q large number of liquor selling nations might effect or seek To effect in the United States, backed up. as undoubtedly they would be, hy some of our own people who are trying L. nunify our constitution:
 "The American government has in l terested itself in times past when some l nation attempted te force upon an other nation policy or practice in consistent with the policy and govern ment Of that nation. Why should not i American diplomacy at this juncture represent the policy of the people Of the United States ill this important natter If. for instance. some nation tried to sell slaves in q country that has no slavery, or 10 force opium CD country that forbids the opium traffic. would the United States pursue il hands off policy:
 Tn it's broader aspects. the Monroe doctrine applies here. It's applica- l tion should be made before it is too | late
 l But there is q deeper motive in this 1 Spanish demand than simply to sell some wine in Iceland. At the most. the people of the little country would not be heavy consumers of wine; it seems proba bie, therefore, that Spain has made this attack for other and more far-reaching reasons. First. i1 order that ii may establish a prece- dent through breaking down the self determination of small nations, not only increasing the range of market for Spanish wines, but establishing Il dangerous trade principle.
 Secondly. it is entirely probable that the demand was made as left 1 handed slap at America Iceland has dared to take the same step her big l friend. the United States, had taken. l Spain k thereby serving notice on the 1 nited States Of her contempt for our constitution and notice that if she and other wine countries could. they would even dare To combine and attack our self determinatio
 There certainly exists no doubt as to the right Of any nation 10 adopt such policies with respect 10 the liquor l question as IL ueslfes. Inc lHl1'a States and Iceland have elected 10 go dry Spain may have a right to elect
 to remain wet, but no right 10 break down the prohibition of other nations.
 Before our civil war America had
 slaves Great Britain had abolished slavery in all her domains. She did not seek to force us to abolish slavery, but .he did insist, and rightfully, that