The American issue. [volume] (Westerville, Ohio) 1912-19??, 1931-01-01

ftN1EAN
States or of any state but to the several
legislatures, which acted in alleged exer-
else of a special power purporting to be
conferred upon them by Article V of the
constitution of the United States"
Despite this contention, the supreme
court unanimously upheld the amend
ment.
The point having been made part of
the original bill OF complaint in the ma
tional prohibition cases, incorporated in
the record, urged upon the court and
ruling upon it being necessary to a de-
eision, the announced conclusions of the
supreme court holding the Eighteenth
Amendment valid render the present
question res judicata.
The Ei gh t e e 4 Amendment was
adopted in exactly the same manner as
all previous amendments. II it is invalid
then these are also. United States District
Judge Walter G. Lindley, Of Chicago, sue
cinctly pointed cut the fallacy Of Judge
Clark's ruling when he is reported TO have
said
There isn't any power granted the
United States that wasn't given it by the
different states II Judge Clarks ruling is
right. there isn't a law enacted by con-
gress that isn't void. Slavery would be
legal, because the law prohibiting it was
enacted by congress on matter pre-
yiously under the jurisdiction of the diff
ferent states"
The tenth amendment, upon which
Judge Clark in part predicates his ruling,
is an amendment which was adopted in
exactly the same manner as the Eight
zenith Amendment
Judge Clark's opinion suggests that he
is discussing the method Of amendment
which he considers desirable rather than
what the existing Article V providing for
constitutional amendments means. In the
opening paragraph Of his opinion he de-
clares:
The traditional method of adopting
amendments to the United States consti-
tuition Is challenged. Upon the outcome of
that CHALLENGE depends the disposition Of
the case at bar. Even if this opinion meets
with q cold reception in the appellate
courts, we hope that it will at least have
the effect of focusing the country's
thought upon the neglected method Of
considering constitutional amendments in
conventions"
The language OF Judge Clark suggests
new and unusual view of the judicial func-
ton. Tt is difficult to reconcile this eX-
preston with the declarations Of the
United States supreme court as to what it
regards as the proper scope Of its judicial
duties IN Martin VS.. Hunters Lessee,
Wheat. 304, 346,decided in 1916, the opin-
ion in which was written by that eminent
jurist, Mr.. Justice Story, he said
1T is manifest that the constitution has
proceeded upon a theory Of its own, and
given or withheld powers according to the
judgment of the American people, and
cannot inquire into the policy or prin-
ciples which induced the grant of them"
The Eighteenth Amendment has been in
force for ten years. It's validity has been
repeatedly recognized by congress in the
passage Of legislation for its enforcement,
by political parties in their platforms, and
by candidates for public Office. The
United States supreme court has declared:
Maynard VS.. Fill, 125 U. S. 1909
"a long acquiescence in repeated acts
Of legislation on particular matters, is evil
dence that those matters have been gem
orally considered by the people as proper
y within legislative control
The department Of justice is to be COM
mended for seeking a prompt review by
the United States supreme court Of the
opinion of United States District Judge
William Clark, of New Jersey, holding the
Eighteenth Amendment invalid because
congress submitted it for ratification to
the legislatures instead of to conventions
in the several states.