Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-01-05
Unanimously Affirms Convic-
ton of Vermont Man Ac-
cuSed of Possession.
VIEW is CONTRARY
TO CLARK DECISION
Ruling Declares Supreme Court
Already Has Decided Amend
ment Constitutional.
BY the Associated Press.

BY the Associated Press.
NEW YORK, January 5.-The United
States Circuit Court of Appeals held
today that the eighteenth amendment
was constitutionally adopted. 1t made
its ruling in decision unanimously
affirming the conviction of Louis E
Thibault, of Windsor, Vermont, accused
of possessing and selling two pints OF
whisky.
The appellate court thus took con-
trary view to that expressed in Newark,
N. j., recently by Federal Judge William
Clark, who held the eighteenth amend
ment was illegally adopted
The decision declared that the Su-
preme Court already had decided that
"the amendment had been lawfully
proposed and ratified and had become
a part of the Constitution and must
be respected and given effect, the same
as the other provisions Of that instru-
ment.."
Harry B. Amey, United States attor-
ney in Vermont, represented the Gov
eminent at the hearing on appeal
while Selden Bacon and Daniel F,
Cohalan, who assisted in presenting the
case of William Sprague before Judge
Clark, also appeared for Thibault.
Text Of Opinion.
The opinion of the court, written by
Judge Manton, said:
1T Is argued that after ratification OF
the tenth amendment no amendment
giving the National Government addi-
tional power over the people of their
rights can be adopted save by the peo-
pie in convention. The eighteenth
k1Iyf he ao{c
latures of three-fourths Of the several
States.
THE fifth article of the Constitution
contemplates, by its phrase, two modes
of ratification, ID by the Legislatures
of three-fourths of the several States,
and 90 by conventions in three-fourths
thereof, as the one or other mode of
ratification may be proposed by the
Congress. But it is argued that Con-
gress never selected the one appropriate
to the nature of the amendment pronnu-
gated by it, and, 1t is said that when
the trainers of the Constitution focused
their work on future amendments Of the
document they were confronted by its
dual function as a chart to guide the
new supergovernment.
I'm national prohibition cases the
Supreme Court Squarely held that the
eighteenth amendment, prohibiting the
manufacture, sale transportation, i'm
portation and expectation of intoxicat-
ing liquors for beverage purposes, was
within the power to amend as reserved
by the fifth article of the Constitution;
that the amendment had been lawfully
proposed and ratified and had become
a part of the Constitution and must be
respected and given effect the same as
the other provisions of that instru-
ment.
Ratification Method Approved.
There has been long acquiescence
and approval of the method of pro-
posing and ratifying amendments as
followed in the case of the eighteenth
amendment. The Constitution was
adopted in 1889. The first 10 amend
ments were adopted in 1891. All, even
the first 10, were proposed and rati-
fed in like manner to the eighteenth.
Pursuant to article the alternative
power was vested in the people, to be
exercised by a choice of members of
the legislatures of the several States,
or the constitutional conventions, and
by the choice of representatives il
Congress.
IF it is the will Of the people to
change by amendment the Constitution,
the method provided in article was
effective even after the passage of the
tenth amendment. Supreme Court
cases referred to are authoritative and
binding upon us. 1t follows that the
defense interposed of unlawful ratif1ca-
ton Of the eighteenth amendment is
without merit. The Judgment of con-
viction Is affirmed
Counsel for Thibault plan to carry
the case on appeal to the United States
Supreme Court.
nErTSTnN nETAV SnTIcuT