New Britain herald., 1928-08-24

That perhaps was not surprising
considering how dry Daniels is.
But there was one sta cement in
Daniels might review that ought
not to go unchallenged in view of
the fact ne directly contradicted one
of the statements of fact in the
Smith acceptance speech. 1t will be
remembered that Governo. Smith
had referred to the pom, OF Amerl-
can history that Woodrow Wilson
when President had vetoed the
Nolstead Act, Comes Editor Daniels
and says the following:
Governor Smith has been
mislnformed as to Wilson's
views. Wilson signed the
Nolstead Act, which he called
salutary and said, 1t was intro
duced to fur'h her a great re-
form.
Now who was right. Smith Or
Daniels
Smith, of course, The Nolstead Act
was vetoed by President Wilson late
in the day of October -. 1919:
Congress passed it over his veto the
following day.
In this day when prohibition is d
major issue still it may be of inter-
est to numberless readers to read
the Wilson veto message; and for
the benefit of these and others who
might profit by the Wilsonian logic
We are glad to reprint this import
ant document. as taken from IT,
files of The Herald on October IS.
1919:
To the House Of Representatives.:
| ! am returning without my sigma
! ture H. R.-6S10. An act to prohibit
+ Intoxicating beverages and to regu-
/ late the manufacture, production
use and sale of high proof spirits
/ for other than beverage purposes
and to insure an ample supply OF
alcohol and promite its use in scien-
titic research and in the development
! of nd at har la,rf,ll n
dustries."
The subject matter treated in this
measure deals with two distinct
phases of the prohibition legisla-
ton. One part Of the act under con-
sideration seeks to enforce wartime
prohibition. The other provides for
the enforcement which was made
necessary by the adoption of the
Constitutional Amendment.
l object and cannot approve that
part of this legislation with reference
to wartime prohibition.
IT has to do with the enforcement,
of an act which was passed by rea.
son of the emergency of the wal
and whose objects have been satisfied
in the rehabilitation of the army
and the navy and whose repeal
have already sought at the hands Of
Congress. Where the purposes o.
particular legislation arising out o
war emergency have been satisfied
sound public policy makes clear thu
reason and necessity for repeal.
1t will not be difficult for Congress!
in considering this important matte
to separate these two questions an,
effectively to lesislate resardin:
them. making the proper distinction
between temporary causes whicl
arose out of wartime emergency AM
those like the Constitutional Amend
ment of prohibition. which il nov
part of the fundamental law of tn,
country.
In all matters having to do will
the personal habits and custom
of large numbers of people We mus
processes of legal change are fol
lowed. In no other way can tn
salutary object sought to be accom-
plished by great reforms of thi
characterize made satisfactory ant
permanent.
WOODROW WILSON.
The White House,
9th October. 1919.
1t will be noted that para gra pl
in Governor Smiths acceptanc
speech was in substance similar T.
the last para graph of the Wilso,
veto message. And Governor Smith
entire premise on prohibition |
based upon the belief that the lay
as we have II is not Satisfactory
and should not be permanent"