Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-02-24
Unanimous Opinion Delivered
by Justice Roberts Holds
State Legislatures Were
Given Right to Ratify.
OVERTHR0WS CONTENTION
CONVENTIONS REQUIRED
Tribunal Declares Congress Has
Full Authority to Determine
Method to Be Used in Voting
Approval for Addition to Federal
Constitution.

BY the Associated Press
The eighteenth amendment was
SUSTAINED as valid today by the
Supreme Court.
The courts decision was unani-
NOUS.
The decision was delivered by
Justice Roberts before a crowded
court room. He stated that Con-
gresS was granted complete juris-
diction to decide the mode Of
ratification and that it had the
right to refer the amendment to
legislatures for ratification.
Under the decision the Gov
eminent will continue its efforts
to enforce the VolStead law.
The ruling was handed down
in the Governments appeal from
the decision of Federal Judge
William Clark of New Jersey, who
held the amendment invalid be-
cause improperly ratified.
Quashed Beer Indictment.
Judge Clark commended that to be
valid the amendment should have been
submitted to State conventions for rati-
flcation rather than to State Legisla-
lures. This view the court found un-
tenable.
When William H. Sprague and Will
liam j. Howey we're brought to trial
before Judge Clark on a charge of pos
sessing and transporting so half bar
rels of beer, he quashed the Indictment,
holding the prohibition amendment in
valid.
In an exhaustive opinion he took the
position that as the eighteenth amend
ment attempted to transfer to the Fed
eral Government jurisdiction over rights
reserved to the people 1t should have
been submitted to them in State con-
ventions for ratification.
He held that its ratification by State
Legislatures was insufficient to make 1t
effective.
The Government appealed at once.
The Supreme Court expedited the pro-
ceedings, hearing oral arguments IN
about a month, although counsel for the
defendants sought approximately three
months more time.
Chief Justice Withdrew.
Contending the question raised by
Judge Clark had already been before
the Supreme Court in the national
prohibition cases, Solicitor General
Thacher in a brief argument declared
the court had disposed OF the contro-
versy.
julius Henry Cohen and Selden
Bacon. counsel for the defendants, con-
tended amendments granting new pow
ers to the Federal Government over the
people must be submitted to the people
fer approval.
AS the eighteenth amendment pro-
posed to grant such powers 1t was In
valid, they insisted, because 1t had been
submitted to State Legislatures for ratl-
fication, instead Of conventions.
Chief Justice Hughes withdrew from
the case. stating he would take no part
in its decision because he had filed a
brief in a previous prohibition case,
which. in his judgement, diSqualihed
him from participating.
The controversy turned on the in
ferpretation to be placed by the courts
on article v of the Constitution which
provides that amendments shall be
valid when ratified by the legislatures
OF three-fourths Of the States or by
conventions in three-fourths of the
States "aS the one or the other mode OF
ratification may be proposed by Con-
gresS."
Judge Clark held the language should
be construed as modified by principles
OF political science" and that such
Continued on Page 2, Column D.