Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-05-28
Rate by Mail-PayabIe in Advance.
MARYLAND and virginia.
Jones Challenges the VETS.


Senator Wesley L. Jones of Wash
ington, ardent dry, has announced that
If the people of his State should vote,
in referendum, for repeal or modifica-
ton Of the eighteenth amendment. he
would vote for the submission of such
an amendment to the States. 1t is
quite true tlHat Senator Jones asserted
his firm belief that the people of the
State of Washington would overwhslm-
ingly defeat any proposal looking
toward legalizing the sale of liquor If
it were submitted to them in a refer
endum. Nevertheless, Senator Jones'
declaration that he would vote wet"
although such action would not con-
form to his personal views on the liquor
question, provided majority of the
voters in his State favored repeal or
modification of the prohibition amend
ment, will scarcely be satisfactory to
the dyed-in-the-wool dry" The Jones
statement is really, however, challenge
to the vets.
The attitude of Senator Jones in this
matter is in conformity with the basic
principle laid down when the United
States Government was created. That
principle is that the people shall rule
through their elected representatives in
the Senate, the House and the White
House. Those representatives are
chosen by majority vote, directly by
the people in senatorial and congress
sional elections and by majority of
the electoral college IN the case of the
Chief Executive. The underlying prin-
ciple is majority rule, first in the choice
Of oficials and then in their action as
representatives of the people.
The eighteenth amendment was
adopted in complete conformity with the
rules laid down by the Constitution. If
it is to be repealed or amended, that
action, too, must follow the rules. The
people and their representatives, how
ever, have exactly the same right to
amend the eighteenth amendment as
they had to adopt 1t. 1t is no more
sacred than any other part Of the Con-
stitution. On the other hand, efforts
to nullify the eighteenth amendment in
any other way are clearly reprehensible.
It Is against notification that Senator
Jones, Senator Borah Of Idaho and
other members of the Senate and House
have taken firm stand.
The control of the liquor trafic by
the Government Is an age-old problem.
The most ardent wet will not now adj
vance the theory that the liquor traffic
should not be controlled None of the
leaders of the vets today propose the
return Of the corner saloon as a dis
penser OF alcoholic beverages. The
problem has been and continues TO be
the finding OF the best method of con-
trolling the liquor trafic. Only those
persons who wish to close their eyes to
existing facts will deny that the prob
lem of the control of liquor traffic still
exists. 1t Is an Illicit liquor trafic, to
be sure, but 1t Is trafic of huge pro-
portions. In more than a decade of
experimentation with national prohibf>
ton the Government has not yet been
able to control this liquor traffic.
Dwight w. Morrow of New Jersey,
candidate for the Republican senatorial
nomination, has taken the stand that
control of the liquor traffic should be in
the hands Of the States alone and not
of the Federal Government. 1t is not
his contention that there should be no
control of liquor trafic. To him it is
merely a matter of government-which
government, Federal or State. Mr..
Morrow is entitled to his view, just as
Is Senator Jones, who believes in ma
tional prohibition. In the end, however,
both must submit to the decision Of the
people themselves in this matter.