The American issue. [volume] (Westerville, Ohio) 1912-19??, 1931-04-01


the disposal for beverage purposes of
liquors manufactured before the
amendment became effective just as it
may be against subsequent manufac-
ture for those purposes.
Now members of the senate, I want to
call your attention to sentence in that
decision which you can never disregard.
Ut is a constitutional mandate or proVi-
sion that is being enforced) Mr.. Justice
White in a concurring opinion, in which
he discusses at length the whole PROPOSE
ton, says:
But as the power of both congress
and the states in this instance is given
by the constitution in one and the
same provision I again find myself
unable to accept the view urged be-
cause it ostensibly accepts the cOnsti-
tutional mandate as TO the concur
renee of the two powers and then pro-
ceeds Immediately by way of inter
probation to destroy it by making one
paramount over the other.
Mr.. Justice Clark in a dissenting opinion
upon other phases of the case, said with
reference to the mandate to the states:
The presumption must always be in
dulged in that a state will support and
not defy the requirement of the ma
tional constitution.
Tt is manifest not only from the reading
of the second section of the Eighteenth
Amendment but from the reading of every
decision of the supreme court of the
United States upon the subject, that it was
the intention of the congress of the United
States when the amendment was sub
mitted, and it was the intention of the
legislatures of the states when the amend
ment was ratified, that enforcement would
be by a system Of cooperation between the
enforcement agencies of the federal gov
eminent and those of the state govern
ments This is essential if there is to be
any proper enforcement of the law. The
federal government is not equipped to per-
form police duties on any thorough and
effective scale; while on the other hand,
state governments are organized for that
precise purpose, and every police officer in
the state of Illinois takes a solemn oath
that he will do So And under that same
constitution senators and representatives
in the congress of the United States, and
senators and representatives in the sew
eral state legislatures, are bound by oath
to support the constitution; it is their
duty to do so, and not to nullify the SUI
preme law of the land.
Can it be true? Can ir be possible that
the proponents of this measure will advo-
cate repeal of all legislation regulating
the liquor traffic without offering some
substitute therefor? Is it possible that
gentlemen will suggest the return of the
saloon in Illinois, to run with free hand
and damnable influence upon society, poll
tics and humanity, unrestrained?
But in answer to this question, I hear
the proponents of this measure say there
will be no saloons; that they are against
saloons; that they hope the day will never
come when saloons will return.
Well, in reply to that wish to state that
a place where hogs are kept is hog pen,
no matter by what name you call it; and a
place where liquor is sold is a saloon, a
breeder of crime, a rendezvous for crooks,
a hangout for prostitutes and destroyer
of the home, no matter by what name you
call it or how you dress it up.