Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-03-01

It was great debate: in fact, some
think it takes place as one of the great
est oratorical jousts in Senate history,
but the consensus seems to be that Sem
ator Borah and Senator Reed in their
brilliant discussion of prohibition did no
more than remind us with all their
eloquence that we have problem that
is still unsolved'
The quotation is from the Milwaukee
Journal, which thus prefaces the con-
clusion: 1--WE cannot. if there were no.
other reason than the 100000 auto
mobiles on our streets and highways, go
back to the old regime. But neither can
we continue our present pace and hope
to retain any respect for law. Borah
and Reed are not helpful in meeting the
new problems. Yet both do service in
reminding us that with all their elo-
quence we have problem that is still
unsolved."
THE Reed-Borah debate may have
delighted the Senators and the gall
leries," says the Kansas City Journal
Post, but 1t could not accomplish any,
thing. Senator Reed cussed out the
eighteenth amendment and did a good
job of it. Senator Borah did not defend
it as an amendment. He did not have
to- That was not the issue. The real
issue is what Congress is going to do
about 1t, under the oath each member
takes to support the supreme law OF the
land"
so long as such differences exist" in
the opinion of the Hartford Courant, lit
will be as impossible to enforce the
amendment as 1t will be to repeal it.; as
impossible to compel obedience to the
law as to modify it, Obviously, this Is
not situation that can contine in
definitely. A way out must somehow be
found, and we believe that the intell-
gence, good sense and ingenuity of the
American people will find It,"
Each of the debaters," in the judg-
ment of the Philadelphia Evening Bull
letin, must be credited with a sincere
and powerful presentation of the views
of very large following. But the
question with which they dealt will not
be settled by oratorical effort. Whether
prohibition can be made effective
whether the corruption that follows in
Its train can be held in check--we can
learn only in the school of experience.
It will be easier to form sound opin-
ion after Mr.. Hoover has had chance
to grapple with the problem"
Senator Reeds speech" remarks the
Seattle Daily Times, might we'll be re-
garded as his farewell flourish or his
last Parthian shot Never was his skill
in the use of irony, sarcasm and invec-
tive shown to better advantage. His
matches vocabulary and his ability to
make telling phrase never have been
displayed more effectively. One may
not agree with Senator Reed on political
subjects. but there Is no denying his un-
usual powers as a public speaker"
X
The Fort Worth acknowledgement
says: 1T was merely one orator trying
to blow out his candle with a flourish
and another trying to snuff his into a
flame sufficiently bright to be individ-
ualistic in the imminent administration
glow. The subject? Why, there
wasn't any. The thunder declared
things to be SO bad that they cannot
become any worse. The reverberation
announced that things are so bad that
they are certain to become better be-
cause there is no other place to CO.
The arguments? There weren't any Of
those. either. 1t was just oratory." The
Syracuse Herald also declares that 'it
did nothing but oratorical veneering to
the perennial discussion of the merits
and enforceability of the eighteenth
amendment and the Volstead act"
Reed challenged the past. Borah
challenged the future" concludes the
New York Evening Post. Like the
President-elect, the Senator from Idaho
made the grave and hopeful admission
that our present prohibition condition
Is but an experiment. He demanded
formulation of the next stage of that
experiment. He had right to do SO.
You can't beat somebody with nobody,
runs the old political maxim. And, In
the same way. You can't beat some
plan with no plan" Nevertheless. the
| Asheville Times holds that "Borah
speaks for the American ma jority," and
ent situation. this majority believes