The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1930-12-17
Prominent Men and Women
Are Divided in Opinions
on Decision.
BIZ nnited presa

NEW YORK, Dec. 1.-THE I'M
expected decision of the validity of
the eighteenth amendment by Judge
William Clark in Newark Tuesday
aroused great excitement among
leaders of the wet" and dry"
causes and many other prominent
persons today.
Dry advocates cited cases Of
decade ago in supporting their be-
lief that speedy reversal in high
er courts would follow the ruling
that the eighteenth amendment
was unconstitutional
1.-THE New York lawyers seem to
be threshing old straw and they
face inSuperable legal obstacles"
said a statement from Edward B.
Dunford. legal expert of the Anti
Saloon league. Substantially the
same points were made by counsel
equally as distinguished in their
argument before the United States
supreme court in 1920"
ScOff at Action
Mrs. Ella Boole, president of the
Women'S Christian Temperance
Union, and the Rev. James K.
Shields, New Jersey superintendent
of the Anti Saloon League, agreed
in the statement that 'if, as Judge
Clark reasons, the eighteenth
amendment is void, other amend
nents ratified in the same manner
should be removed from the Con-
stitution."
The dry leaders, as whole, took
the decision lightly, and were unani-
nous in their belief that a higher
court would soon reverse it.
Daniel F. Cohalan, former supreme
court justice, and a member Of the
defense in the case, predicted the
effect of the decision would be Eek
traordinary."
Mrs. Charles H. Sabin, chairman
of the women's organization fer ma
tional prohibition reform, agreed
the decision raised fundamental
point, but refused to predict its out
come.
Other prominent advocates of re-
peal said the decision was sound"
important" or very interesting"
Coming to Senses
DIR. Nicholas Murray Butler, pres
ident of Columbia university: 1T
shows the courts are coming to their
senses"
Canon William Sheaf Chase, SUI
perintendent of the international
reform federation, prominent advo-
cate of prohibition: II am not
alarmed at the decision. 1t seems
to me a desperate effort to find
some reason to reverse the will and
expressed desire of the vast ma
jority of the American people"
Professor Leslie j. Tompkins, head
of New York university law school:
Il regard the decision as the most
important since the bred Scott rul-
ing, and think Judge Clark's de-
cision was a very courageous act.
This decision will bring about a
speedy determination of the entire
prohibition question in the supreme
court.
Mrs. Carrie Chapman Gait: "I
think Judge Clark must be far off
in his knowledge of the eighteenth
amendment"
Sound, Says Du Point
Pierre S. Du Pont, chairman of
the executive committee of the
Association Against the Prohibition
Amendment: Il am very much
pleased to hear of the decision, and
I am sure it is sound"
Dudley Field Malone: "I congrat-
ulate Judge Clark upon his decision.
1T is no surprise to me that judge
at last should recognize the amend
ment is unconstitutional. This will
bring it out into the open"
DR.. John Grier Hibben, president
of Princeton university: THE de-
cision is most interesting, since it
throws new light Or the question"
Commander Evangeline 3ooth of
the Salvation Army: 81 find it
difficult to imagine that the supreme
court will stultify its consistent at
titude that both eighteenth amend
ment and the Volstead act are con-
stitutional."
Representative James M. Beck
Rep., Pa, chairman of the house
wet block executive committee: 1T
was to be regretted that the su-
preme court did not consider this
point when it considered the pro-
hibition cases in 1920. It is not easy
for the court at this late day to con-
slider this point. But the court did
consider a point involved in the
bred Scott case thirty years after
that decision was handed down"
Assistant Attorney General Aaron
A. Youngquist and Prohibition Di-
rector Woodcock refused to COM
ment.