Atlanta tri-weekly journal. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1920-19??, 1923-06-14
..BRYAN A FANATIC,
|. SCORNS ALL FACTS,
GOV. SMITH SAYS

ALBANY, N. Y, June 11.-"Laws
regulating the personal conduct of
the individual have only been sue
cessful when they have parslleled
a divine commandment" and the
inherent dishonesty of the Volstead
act tends to promote dishonesty iE
it's enforcement" Governor Alfred
K. Smith said last night in g. state
ment answering five questions on
prohibition asked by the New York
Times and answered by William Jen-
nings Bryan in the edition Of Sun
day morning, in which he criticised
the governors attitude on the liquor
and state rights question.
THE New York Times has request.
ed me to answer William Jenning
Bryan's article in its edition Of Sun.
day, June 10, wherein Mr.. Bryan UNI
dertoo1 to reply to five questions
submitted to him by that newspa-
per-" said Governor ~mith.
1.-The flrst question he is asked is
will prohibition be a leading issue
in the next Democratic convention"
Running true to form, he uses a
thousand words in replying and says
nothing.
mo living person could answer
the second question, What strength
will the vets and drys be able to
command? Mr.. Bryan attempts it
and says less than he did about the
first question.
Mr.. Bryan could answer the third
question, DO you believe prohibition
will continue to be an issue in ma
tional politics?' by saying that it
never has been an issue as the ques-
ton of repeating the eighteenth
amendment probably never will be;
but it is quite possible that a sane
and sensible definition of what con-
stitutes an intoxicating beverage
might be a permanent issue.
THE fourth question, What eff
feet has Governor Smiths action on
the Cuvillier bill had on the nation
al situation" Mr.. Bryan answers by
making reference to King Alco-
hoP and to woman suffrage.
when he answers the fifth Ques-
IAOll W1ioI VI my do
sertion o. states rights in connection
with his action?', the Great Common
err rises to the heights of absurdity.
According to Mr.. Bryan there is ap-
parently no such thing as states
rights. If that is not a fair infer
ence to take from his remarks one
must take the only other possible,
and that is, that Mr.. Bryan himself
does\ not understand what stGtNs
rights mean. Mr. Bryan mas
had more opportunities to study the
federal government and it's opera
ton than I have had and he knows
everything [ say is right, but he be-
longs to the class of fanatical drys
about whom l spoke in my recent
memorandum, who will never admit
anything; when a fanatic begins to
acknowledge the truth his cause is
lost.
Laws regulating the personal con-
duct of tn individual have only been
successful when they have paralleled
Divine Commandment. People will
suffer regulation of their conduct
outside of the commandments when
it can be shown to them that such
regulation is for the protection of
the health of their neighbOrs. AS
far as strong liquor is concerned.
there may enter into this a reason
able contention that its abolition
might tend to promote the public
health generally, but that cannot be
said about liquors Of low alcoholic
content.
1.-The Inherent dishonesty of the
Volstead Act tends to promote dis.
honesty in it's enforcement. Mr..
Bryan knows as we'll as I do that the
Volstead Act is a dishonest and hypo-
critical Interpretation Of the Eight
zenith amendment. He knows as
I do that the fanatical drys in con-
troll of congress wrote that law to
accomplish their narrow and bigoted
purposes and not to give honest ex-
preston to a constitutional amend
ment.
IF Mr.. Bryan's reasoning is to be
followed to its logical conclusion,
three quarters of one per cent OF al
cohol in a beverage intoxicante. No
body with an ounce of brains behves
that. Nh. Bryan speaks for
himself alone and he will have to
travel some to get any sound.minded
person to believe that We are al
tempting to interfere with the con-
stitution-when We ask congress to
amend the Volstead Act"