Evening star., 1923-06-03
SHARPER DRY LAW
TEETH TO Be ASKED
OF NEW CONGRESS
Especial Provisions to Meet
! Situation Such as in New
York Planned.
HOUSE AND SENATE VETS
JUBILANT OVER TREND
Say Smiths Action Will Lead to
EARLY Modification of Vol
stead Act.

More l"teeth" in the federal prohi-
bition law to meet the situation
which has arisen through the repeal
of the state enforcement code in
New York will be demanded by the
"drys'' when Congress meets next
December. it was indicated here last
night
The "wets' in Congress. on the
other hand, hailed the action of the
New York Legislature and Gov.
Smith as the frst real move toward
the modification Of the prohibition
laws.
Senator Broussard Of Louisiana,
Niemocrat. who has always opposed
The Volstead act, and who has favor
ed a change in the law permitting
the use of light wines and beer II
nothing elise can be obtained, said
The action of New York state is
the first real move toward bring
ing about It. a sensible modification
of the prohibition act. There has
been much talk hitherto about modi-
fication. but New York has now set
van example which I believe will be
followed lin other states. In the end,
the result will undoubtedly be a
modification OF the Volstead act"
Would Provide Jail Term.
Senator Curtis OF Kansas. republi-
can whip of the Senate and a potent
influence In the Senate, said that in
his opinion the way to make prohi-
bition really effective would be to
have the federal law provide for pun
fshment for violation of the law by
fine and Imprisonment. Under the
existing law the punishment Is by
fine or Imprisonment.
Put all the violators ofrthe-s law
in JAIL" said Senator Curtis, "'and the
violators of the law would soon
dwindle in number. We had our
lesson in this matter in Kansas back
in the sos. For number of years
violators of the prohibition law got
off with fines. The consequence was
that the law was broken often. But
when we started putting them in jail
there was another story.
THE federal government will have
to go ahead In New York state and
enforce the law. The cases will be
transferred to the federal courts.
But Gov. Smith has indicated that the
state officers are to be called upon
to help enforce the federal law and
to arrest violators."
Cfte Recent Decision.
Another reason advanced in some
80 eSr oth
ing the federal law was the recent
decision by a federal Judge in New
York that that part of the Volstead
act limiting the amount of liquor
which may be prescribed medicinal
ly by physicians was unconstitu-
eional. Some members of Congress
who believe in prohibition also be-
tieve that the New York decision in
regard to physicians was correct and |
that Congress went too far in the
Volstead and anti-beer acts.
If physicians are to be permitted
TO prescribe liquor in unlimited
quantities, it was said. then the pen
alties for violation of the law should
be imprisonment and not a fine witE
the alternative of Imprisonment.
While general regret was expressed
by the members Of Congress now in
Washington that Gov. Smith had
signed the repeal bill. the opinion
was expressed that he had a perfect
right to do so.
Talk of a rum rebellion" in New
York and by New York was dis
counted. It was pointed out that in
Massachusetts and Maryland state
prohibition laws have never been
enacted, yet there has been no talk
of rebellion" by those states.
scouts Double Jeopardy.
Senator Curtis said that he did not
believe the argument advanced by
Gov. Smith to the effect that there
was double jeopardy" in having a
state prohibition law as well as the
federal law was worth considering.
Senator Fletcher of Florida, demo-
crat, on the other hand, suggested
that IL might be well to amend. the
federal law to provide specifically
against the double jeopardy"
The Florida senator expressed re-
gret that the repeal bill had been
signed. The. federal congress, he
said, had enacted laws to carry out
the prohibition amendment to the
constitution. Whether the states
should enact such laws, he said, was
optional. The federal law in any
case should be enforced in all the
states. he. said ..,- ..>
Senator Shields, democrat, Tennes-
see, made the following statement:
There is no question but what
the state of New York has the right
to enact or repeal any of it's statutes
in its discretion which do not violate
the Constitution of the United States
and do. it without consulting the
President or any other federal au-
thority. The passage of the Curil-
]ier law and the approval of it by
Gov. Smith, in nay opinion, in no way
conflicts with the Constitution of the
United States and 1 see no possible
ground upon which the federal gov
Fernment had the right to interfere.
Is Supreme Law.
The eighteenth amendment, IS.
however. the supreme law of the
lContinued on Page 2, Column a.