Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1927-07-10

Mrs. Douglas Robinson, known to the
world for her support Of hospitals.
Salvation Army work, patriotic
activities, lectures and writings in
poetry and prose, why / oppose
the prohibition law:
First or all, after seven years it
has been proved the law connot be
adequately enforced. l want you to
emphasize the word adequately 1t
is waste of peoples money to try to
enforce it.
Second. feel it is in several re-
spects unconstitutional; it Is against
the spirit Of the Constitution. En-
phasize the word spirit
Third. From my own observation
l have seen infinitely greater latitude
in drinking than before the eighteenth
amendment passed. 1t has engendered
such hypocrisy that the morale of the
country Is going down hill.
Fourth. /. find a distinctly rebel.
lious feeling abroad In the land which
tends to the abuse of liquor and leads
to disrespect, If not contempt. for law
and for those in high Offices who
should be looked upon as moral lead
ers and builders of national charac-
ter. Thus people are becoming worse
citizens than they would otherwise
have become.
Young Are Being Harmed.
Fifth. The young are being
harmed A girl thinks it right that
her partner should have his flask, and
naturally this attitude makes him less
restrained than he would normally
be-"
T. RS loyal sister has not reached
hny {,,Ju,,ooptc ha cfilv from NOV.
row approach. Her speaking during
the Liberty Loan drives, in the Saliva
ton Army war campaigns and her
manifold work with the Red Cross
and for hospitals and welfare socie-
ties in peace time, her social life,
political affiliations, clubs and author.
ship, all have led her into the byways
as we'll as the highways of humanity.
Her convictions are as firm as her
famed and strenuous brothers., and
her speech very like his. A woman
who sees the heart side of things, and
gets the spirit as we'll as the letter
of a law.
after very serious thought" Mrs.
Robinson goes on to say, II feel that
the eighteenth amendment is a sin
against temperance, brought about by
mistaken effort to force moral con-
duct artificially upon the people.
II know that in certain parts of
the country a change for the better
has been noted. 1t may be that Ger.
tain forced attitudes have been
brought about, but there are two ele-
ments In every law--the letter of it
and the moral of it--and this law has
made peoples spirit less high ana fine
than it was
Fears Future Evil.
If the citizenry more generally alb.
stains from liquor than it used to, as
vouched for by such enthusiastic pro.
hibitionists as Mrs. Carrie Chapman
Gait and Mrs. Ella Boole, it is largely
through fear of criticism or through
actual fear of the alcoholic products
themselves, says Mrs. Robinson. Tests
OF liquor cannot always be had, for
one thing, and would-be drinker
passes it by for while. But he is
not convinced moderate drinking is
bad for him. or that the Constitution
has a right to decide for him his per.
sonal tastes.
Il realize" Mrs. Robinson saws,
that many earnest observers see bet
terment since the Volstead act. I only
wish I myself could come more in con-
TACT Will II, Out certainty nave not,
and have truly tried.
I'm some OF the smaller towns, es.
pecially where strong churchly al
legiance Is felt, there may be a firmer
restraint. But in towns and cities
alike, for the most part, there is u
tendency to defy the law and revolt
from it, which BODIES future evil.
Il would certainly not deny what
these other women, who see good re.
suits from prohibition, have said. But
/ myself have been in close touch
with conditions and I have not seen
such results. We all want the same
things-temperance and national recti-
tude. We differ only in our ideas of
how to attain them"
Cites Proof" Of Failure.
From the figures shown us on the
increase in drunken drivers, drunken
children, patients in alcoholic wards,
consumption Of hard liquors instead of
malt liquors and light wines; from the
reports everywhere showing the re-
bellion of the people against so drastic
measure as the Volstead act, how
can we escape the conclusion that it
has failed to do what it was intended
to do. promote sobriety?
With reliable figures showing that
things grow worse each year and with
the next generation drinking as
never before, where is the hope that
the dry law. in its present form, will
help us even in the long run?
wouldn't wise restriction be better?
Wouldn't it abate much of the scan