The Washington times., 1930-01-15
FIGHTS HOOVER
CHANGES IN
DRY LAW
(consinusd From Page y


ing for Q stiff fight against Ger.
tain other desired pieces Of legis-
lation, not so much to embarrass
the President but because Of q
determination to emphasize to
the country at large that the
laws the drys passed 10 years ago
have failed.
There was q possibility that
relatively speedy action might be
had. on the proposal to take
Slight or casual offenders out
side the scope Of the drastic
Jones "ffve-and-ten" law, but even
this was problemAtica1. Senator
Jones (R.) Of Washington, author
Of that act, has announced gen.
eral agreement to the suggested
notification, but this Is one Of
the statutes the wet element has
resented from the first.
Many Supporters Cold
Even among those who have
made public statements that they
will support the Presidents pro
gram there was some lack Of
sympathy for the Eighteenth
A m e n d m t. Representative
Graham tR.) Of Pennsylvania,
chairman Of the House judiciary
Committee, for instance, pledged
his support to Mr.. Hoover, despite
the fact he docs not believe in
prohibition and believes it Is
morally wrong"
There was general agreement
that the bill introduced yesterday
by Representative Williamson
(R0 Of South Dakota, to transfer
enforcement activities to the De-
partment Of Justice would pass
without much difficulty.
The recommendation that court
commits 'onerS be empowered to
try petty liquor violations-sug.
! geSted as the prime means Of re-
lieving court congestion-appeared
. to be in for prolonged debate.
In 1927 this was suggested to
: Congress and committees Of both
} houses passed 1t up as unconSti-
tutional. agreeing that any such
delegation Of power would have
to be accompanied by the setting
up Of supplemental courts.
Drys Back Mitchell
Ultra-drys are ready to fight
for this reform. backing their ar
gumenSs with the opinion Of At
torney General Mitchell which
accompanied the law enforcement
commissions report that such a
step was legal.
Anti.prohibitionists are expected
to fight the Presidents sugges-
tions. chiefly to emphasize the
fact that 10 years of prohibition
still results in q situation that
needs enforcement more rigid
than ever before was contem-
plated.
Their attitude was reflected by
Senator TydingS Cd of Mary
land. who said: There will be
considerable discussion of prohibl-
ton when the Senate considers
this remedial legislation. For in
stance. I have prepared a murder
box score detailing the number
Of persons slain in enforcing pro-
hibition. There are other inter
esting statistics on drunkenness
and correlative crimes that should
be given to the public in connec-
ton with debate on this legisla-
ton. Some Of the measures pro-
posed should be considered care
fully before being enacted into
law"
Modification Foreseen
Senator Copeland CD Of New
York saw the whole maneuver as
a beginning Of modification. He
personally sees no disposition to
block the program and wants to
give the drys all the money, men
and laws they want because In
the end they will learn the law
can not be enforced and must be
repealed or modified"
In the House, q like move
ment was apparent. The wet
bloc of the lower body at pres
ent Is split on the question Of
leadership. Their executive COM
mittee is meeting again today
to attempt to iron out the queS-
ton.
The race is between Repre-
sentative j. Charles Linthicum
CD of Maryland, leader for the
past two, years, and Represents
tive James M. Beck (RO. Of
Pennsylvania. Regardless of the
outcome, 1t was planned to call
a meeting Of the full wet mem.
berShip on Monday to map out
a policy for meeting the Admins
tration program.
In so far as actual legislative
consideration was concerned, two
matters only were up today. On
the floor Of the House the Treas
ury-P -PoStoffice appropriation bill
was scheduled for consideration.
This includes $4,000, 900
straight for prohibition enforce
ment and additional amounts
which might be applied in con-
nection with the Coast Guard
and Customs. The Judiciary
Committee planned to meet and
map out q program.
They probably will take up the
question of modifying the jones
Law and increasing the powers of
court commissioners first. The
|