Atlanta tri-weekly journal. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1920-19??, 1922-04-27
Woodrow Wilson
AS KNOW HIM
AS | KNOW HIM
BY JOSEPH P. TUMULTY.

the president was the real motive
force that lay back of the movement
to establish the Eighteenth amend
ment as part of the fundamental
law of the country. AS q matter Of
fact, during the discussion of this
amendment in the senate and house,
the president maintained toward it
an attitude of absolute neutrality.
While he was anardent advocate Of
temperance, he felt that congress in
enforcing the amendment by the
passage of the Volstead act, so ex-
IRENE and unreasonable in charac-
ter, had gone long way toward
alternating the support of every tenn
perance-loving citizen in the coun-
try, and that certain of it's provi'
sions had struck at the foundation
of our government by it's arbitrary
interference with personal liberty
and freedom. He felt that the prac-
teal unanimity with which the
I Eighteenth amendment was support
ed arose from a nationwide resent
ment against abuses by the Ameri-
can saloon and the economic evils
that had grown out Of the morgan
| lied liquor traffic. He felt that it
| was unreasonable for congress, in
| the Volstead act, to declare any bev-
erage containing an excess OF one
| half of 1 per cent Of alcohol intoxi-
eating, and that to frame a law
which arbitrarily places Intoxicating
and notwithstanding beverages with
| in the same classification was openly
| to Invite mental resentment against
it, He was of the opinion that it
required no compromise or weaken
| ing Of the Eighteenth amendment
| in order to deal justly and fairly
with the serious protests that fol
lowed the enactment into law of the
Volstead act. He was, therefore, in
favor of permitting the manufacture
and sale, under proper governmental
regulations, of light wines and beers,
which action, in his opinion, would
make it much easier to enforce the
amendment in it's essential part1cu-
lars and would help to end the illicit
| traffic in liquor, which the Volstead
act fostered by it's very severity.
This would put back Of the enforce
men of the Eighteenth amendment
| the public sentiment always neces-
sary to the execution of laws. sat
isfied with q reasonable recognition
of their right to personal liberty ana
control of their personal habits, ne
| believed that the American people
would be the reader to turn their
attention to the grave issues or re-
construction and steadler In meet
| ing these issues which would test
| to the utmost our capacity Tor pro-
| gressive self-government.
Wrong Way for Right Thing
Time and time again, when we dis
cussed the Volstead enforcement act,
| he would say: 1.-THE wrong way or
doing the right thing. You cannot
! regulate the morals and habits OF a
great cosmopolitan people by plac-
| ing unreasonable restrictions upon
their liberty and freedom. All such
| attempts can, only end in failure and
disappointment. In the last analysis
in the matters that seek to regulate
personal habits and customs public
opinion is the great regulator"
In New Jersey, where he served as
governor, the liquor question had
been for many years burning issue
and had been thrust into every gu
bernatorial campaign up to the time
when woodrow Wilson, as governor,
took hold of the situation. Many
political. futures had been wrecked
and wasted by ambitious lolitlcians
who tried to "pussyfoot' on this is
sue. But there was no shying away
from it by Woodrow Wilson. When
| the question was presented to nm
by the ardent advocates of the anti
| Saloon league early in his admins
tration as governor, without evasion
of any kind, he stated his views in
the following letter addressed to the
head of the Anti-Saloon league
Executive Office,
- Trenton, New Jersey.
I am in favor of local option.
1 am a thorough believer in To-
cal self-government and believe
that every self-goVerning COM
munity which constitutes unit
should have the right to control
the matter of the regulation or
the withholding Of licenses.
But the questions involved are
social and moral, not political,
and are not susceptible of being
made parts of a party program.
Whenever they have been made
| the subject matter Of party con-
tests, they have cut the lines of
I party organization and party
action athwart, to the utter con-
! fusion of political action in every
other field, They have thrown
| every other question, however
| important, into the background
and have made constructive par
| / ty action impossible for long
years together.
So far as I am myself con-
cerned, therefore, can never
consent to have the question of
local option made on issue be-
tween political parties in this
state. My judgment is very
clear in this matter. I do not
believe that party programs of
the highest consequence to the