Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-07-23
W|CKERSHAM PLAN
SUGGESTS BALANCE
State Dry Enforcement Would
Broaden Federal Function,
Is Belief. /

The debate widely current on Mr.
Understands proposal abont prohibi-
ton can be clarified by pfcturing the
situation as it would be II Mr.. Wicker
sham's suggestion were carried out. AS
respects the Federal Government, the
only change would he release of it
from the burden Of preventing and pun
ishing small local violations in the
shape Of speakeasieS and petty indi-
vidual violations oftthe sort known as
would be left wholly to the several
States. The Federal Government would
continue to carry out all its other
functions as at present. 1t would carry
them out the more effectively because
OF release from the other burden. The
Federal Government would prevent and
prosecute all smuggling from Canada
or from elsewhere. 1t would prevent
and prosecute all manufacturing on any
considerable scs's, though under the
proposed arrange Inent the States would
probably be left 10 handle petty manu-
featuring. The Federal Government
would prevent and prosecute all trans
portation from one Stale to another.
Two Glasses Of States.
So much for the Federal Govern
ment. In considering what would hap
pen to the States, there are now OBJ
viously two classes Of States. There
are ~ States which now have local
State enforcement laws and which are
now practicing enforcement. These
States would continue to do as they
are now doing. There would be no
change, except one Of morale. At pres
ent these States, as a rule, tend TO
carry ON their enforcement with more
and more laxity. The reason for their
laxness Is that they know they are
duplicating the work Of the Federal
Government. They have q spirit OF
"let Uncle Sam do It"
With the Federal Government with
drawn from handling small local cases
the States would know that such cases
are up to them and up to them solely
Every citizen Of such. States would
know that suppression OF local speak
easieS and prevention OF local INSIDE
meanorS against prohibition is the work
of his State government and Of no one
else. He would look to his State gov
eminent and not TO distant Washing
ton. The confused state OF mind arts
ing from duplication would disappear.
There would be no alibl for the States.
There would be no possibility of pass
ing the buck to Uncle Sam.
We come now to the six States which
either never adopted local enforcement
statutes or else. having adopted them,
later repealed them. AS respects these
six States, the situation would be as 1t
Is now. with one important modiflca-
ton. The citizens Of these States would
know that the Federal Government
would not prosecute local violations in
such States. The citizens would know
that the only way OF getting enforce
ment would be by electing State
Legislature which would pass an en-
forcement act. These States would
have Just two alternatives. and no more.
They could remain without enforce
ment acts and endure the presence of
violations with their eyes open or they
could pass enforcement acts.
Wholly Up to People.
! The choice between these alternatives
would be wholly up to the people of the
/ States. There would be no confusion
OF mind due TO expectation that the
Federal Government would come in and
enforce. Neither would there be any
middle ground. The alternatives would
be confined to the two already named.
No State can pass a law as the Su-
preme Court has put 1t, authorizing
what the eighteenth amendment for
bids" No State could pass a local OPP
ton law or any other kind of license
or regulation of the sale of Intoxicating
liquors" These States would be obliged
to choose between enduring violations
with their eyes open or else passing an
| enforcement law. What these States
and the citizens of these States would
do when actually faced by these alter
natives constitutes an interesting spec
ulation
! What has been said here Is apart
from the question raised by Gov.
Richie of Maryland. His assertion is
that there is no duty, moral or legal.
resting on any State to pass a local
enforcement law merely because the
eighteenth amendment is In the Fed
eral Constitution AS to this conStitu-
tional question, there is difference of
opinion. 1t has no bearing, however. on
what is said here. All that is discussed
here is how State would feel IL 1t had
no local enforcement act and II at the
same time it knew the Federal Govern
ment would not enforce within the
State. This Is the wholly new condition
that would be brought about by the
. adoption OF Mr.. Wickersham's sugges-
ton. What these States and the citi-
Gems of these States would do under
! this condition Is, one repeats, most
interesting speculation.
MIR. Wickersham in another portion
| of his letter suggests that national
and State laws might be modified"
Presumably this means that, as every
body knows. the permitted alcoholic
content can be raised from the present
o. half of per cent upward to some
such limit as 3 or 4 per cent. This
portion of Mr.. Wickersham's letter con-
stitutes another question, separate from
What lie here considered M. ..