The Chapel Hill weekly., 1931-01-30
Random Shots
BIZ Halifax Jones

r1lns down the street with q can tied
70 ms tail. that is not news; but if
dog uali.s down the street with can
tied 10 mis- tail, that Is news"
The point being that the most i'm
portant element in news is the un-
usual, the abnormal, or the unexpect-
I'd.
On this principle Of rarity, the
favorable editorial comments upon
the Wickersham report on prohibition
enforcement should be the most in
teresting; for, the general tone Of
comment throughout the country has
been one Of censure and ridicule.
have noted two exceptions: one
in "The Lantern" (the column IN the
New York Herdid Tribune conducted
by Beverly Smith, and the other IN
piece by H. L. Mencken IN the Balti
more Epening Sun.
In The Lantern" are quoted
several comments, including one by
Senator Walsh IF Massachusetts ("It
is devastating Indictment of pro
nibition"D and one by Senator McGil
of Kansas cit is one Of the creates
tributes ever paid 70 prohibltion"0
" hereupon Mr Smith, The column
conductor, says.
The above comments are all very
we'll The whole question Of prohlbi-
tIon is composed # almost religious
zeaI CON both sdes) Of farce, and
occasionally Of tragedy. Not other
wise could two eminent Senators.
both presumably able to read, bring
in such directly conflicting verdicts.
Not otherwise could the cheer, the
horse laugh and the moan 50 dlscord
antly mingle wherever men gather
together in this vast nation.
But it isn't far 70 the commits
sioners Here are eleven hard-work-
ing, able, deservedly eminent persons
who, az the call Of their President,
j sighted other things 10 devote their
best mental energies for eighteen
months, without cent Of pay, 70 one
Of the toughest and most complex
problems in history.
Read their individual opinions, in
full Each opinion is honestly, reason
ably and intelhgently set forth. Wet
that am, | can't help admiring the
fairness and sincerity Of the two
drest members, Judge Kenyon and
Judge Grubb The opinions Of the
wet majority q cannot help think
inY) are mastery. Eevry one Of the
opinions is good.
What thanks do they get?
From the President who appointed
them, an obscurely worded but de-
finite rebuke From extremists on
both sides, extravagant and embarras-
sing praise From the rest Of the
country the loud bozoo.
Admittedly, by some malign IN
verse alchemy, the gold Of their in
dividuai opinions has been transmit
ed into the meaningless scrap-iron Of
their conclusions' But is it fair to
the commissioners?
Mr.. Mencken writes:
Il have encountered no commentary
upon it which does not sneer at 1t
for vaguencss, for irresolution, for
confusion and inconsistency The
PLAN fact is that, a. the papers 90
in the United States, the report is
a document Of manifold and unusual
merits
The comm ssioners' findings of
fact are quite beyond challenge, and
they present their recommendations
in a becomlngly diffident and sensible
manner"
Mr.. Mencken considers it unfair to
censure the commissioners because OF
variation between the joint report and
the individual statements. The pur-
pose Of the joint report was to rec
0mmend a concrete course of action,
and to that end all theories, however
charming, had to be sacrificed to prac~
ticahties. The commission, as com
mission, had TO keep within the bounds
Of the feasible II had to remember
the extreme difficulty Of making any
change, whether large or small, IN
the 18th amendment or the Volstead
act.
at seems to me that, bearing these
limitations in mind, it did an excel
lent john fact, job so good as to
be almost brilliant. :.
NATURALLY enough, all the commits
sioners did not come to the same con-
clusions; no rational person ever
expected them to do so. But their
very differences, believe, will help
toward the ultimate solution Of the
problem, # only by concentrating at
tention upon its worst difficulties, and
encouraging a frank and forbearlng