Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-11-08

will. be the difference between posses
sing and giving away, and possessing
and selling?
The farmer has neighbor who is an
enemy and another neighbor who Is a
friend. The friend gives him bottle of
wine or beer. The enemy hears of 1t and
charges that it was a purchase. And
the burden of proof of innocence falls
on the innocent recipient of the gift.
Where will such mischief end?
Harvest for Informer.
Try to visualize, if you can, what
would happen if this law should pass. 1t
would be "a harvest for the meanest of
humanity, the spy, sneak and informer.
It would be an opportunity for black
mail, an opportunity for revenge all
created by an amendment which would
be futile, and which instead of curbing
bootlegging would build it up and make
| it more secure.
And it is quite certain that all boot
leggers will favor this so-called Shop
| pard amendment.
After we have by this amendment
created vast new army of criminals,
what shall we do with them after con-
viction?
Chief Justice Taft stated recently
that in 1928 1928 civil cases were COM
menced under the prohibition act, and
55,729 criminal cases, and that, in 1929,
there were already 1887 civil and
| 56,786 criminal cases pending before the
| Federal courts.
Every one knows that our jails, work.
houses and penitentiaries are crowded.
Riots and revolutions In these penal
institutions have taken place with
startling frequency, and we are now
asked to add an entirely new criminal
class which would necessarily and obvi-
ously outnumber the present class.
A few nights ago Attorney General
Mitchell, speaking of the crowded con-
dition of our penitentiaries and tails.
asked for $6,500,000 for their enlarge
ment.
The new law would mean, naturally
long list Of new Federal judges, new
prosecuting attorneys, new enforcement
officers.
In dealing with the bootlegger alone,
according to statement have read,
we have spent $110000,00 for the pro-
hibition unit $97,000,000 for the Coast
Guard, $4,000, 900 for the Department
of Justice, $24 1000, 900 for the Customs
Service-a total of 5000, 000, 000-to
catch the bootlegger.
Increased Enforcement Cost.
Try and realize what it will cost to
vendors of liquor. The director of pro-
hibition is quoted as having said that
to properly enforce the present law will
cost $300,000,000 year. How much do
you think 1t would cost to properly en-
force it with the new enactment?
The Treasury Department reports
that in 1919, the last year before pro-
hibition, revenues collected on alcoholic
liquors Of all kinds amounted to $483,-
Hxy
10, the number of years which have
followed, and add that to the cost of
prohibition enforcement; then add the
additional cost of prosecuting purchas-
erS Of liquor.
In order to arrest the seller, SO pro-
hibition enforcement officers and ITO
civilians, a total of 239, have been
killed in connection with Federal en-
| forcement. To these fatalities add all
those who were shot or wounded, those
who were made blind by poisoned alco-
| hol and those slain or wounded by mu-
nicipal or State officers. How many
more people will be killed II we include
the buyer?
In 1922 22,749 persons were convicted
of possession and selling. They were
sentenced to an aggregate of 1852 years
| Now watch the increase. In 1928
58,813 persons were sentenced to serve
1881 years in our jails and peniten-
| tiaries.
And again note the increase in pend
ing cases in our Federal courts: In
1921 there were 1896, in 1928 there
were pending 1905. !
The total arrests for~possession and
sale up to June 80, 1928, according to
| prohibition department reports, were
| Asa, 474-nearly half a million men,
I women and children.
Amendment Only Fair Way.
If we are to have change to include
the purchaser in %l1e criminal class, the
advocates of this amendment should
ask that it be made tby constitutional
amendment through referendum. For
them this would be the only fair way
in which to accomplish it.
The result of a referendum might
show some very strange results. In the
first place, it would be quickly demon
strated that every bootlegger and ven
| dor of liquor would favor the amend
ment and support it, as they did in the
recent Nova Scotia election.
Nova Scotia is the last Of the big
Canadian provinces to change from
"dry" to "wet," and the vote is inter-
esting and, being as late as october 81
this year, it may be repeated.
For the temperance act there were
81 ,672 votes and against it 56,024. For
| government control, however, there was
the significant vote Of 89,757, against
41,180.
So Nova Scotia, while declaring for
temperance by large vote. at the
same time, by q much larger vote, de-
clared in favor of government control
and regulation--a significant result be-
cause Nova Scotia has been dry for
many years.
1 am sure the friends Of the new
amendment could not consistently OPP
pose national referendum II they
wanted a real expression of opinion
from all our people.
The referendum would cause strange
realignment of forces at the present
time.
Prohibitionists, leading members OF
the Anti-Saloon League, are opposing
it, newspapers which have been con-
sistently in favor of prohibition are
opposing it. But as against these we
would find the bootlegger and some OF
those who believe in making the law
as obnoxious as possible so that 1t may
be repealed more quickly. Whatever the
motive of its supporters, the result would
be an expression that would be valuable.
This question of amending the pres
ent law is common sense matter. Our
10 years. experience has given us facts,
not mere theories on which to base our
conclusions.
Not State in the United States has
ever by State enactment made "pur-
chase" of intoxicating liquors a crime,
although more than majority OF the