Evening star., 1932-07-29
BY DAVID LAWRENCE.

The simple words repeal" or "modi-
ficatiOn" or retention" of the eight
eenth amendment when accompanied
by a desire to achieve a national refer
endum are beginning to reveal upon
analysis as to the procedure. one of the
most complicated problems in the his
tory of American constitutional prac-
tice.
Both the Republican and Democratic
conventions declared in their platforms
that whatever change is made with re-
spect to the eighteenth amendment in
wolves new proposal to be passed by
two-thirdS of Congress, but to be rati-
fed only by conventions called especially
for that purpose in the several States.
The first step, of course, is an agree
ment by tWO-thirdS Of both houses as
to the wording of the amendment itself.
This involves debate on whether, as the
Democrats insist, the question shall be
limited to repeal or retention or whether
some substitute method of liquor con-
troll shall be specified. Assuming, how
ever that two-thirds of both houses can
agree on the phraseology of the new
amendment. the question of procedure
In ratification arises and neither the
Republican nor Democratic platform
plank gives any inkling as to exactly
how the new amendment is to be rati-
fed by State conventions, though ratifi-
cation by State Legislatures is specif1-
cally excluded. The Republican plank
says with respect to the new proposal:
Precedent Is Lacking.
"Such an amendment should be
promptly submitted to the States by
Congress to be acted upon by State
conventions called for that purpose in
Il
Article v of the Constitution and ade-
quately ssfeguarded so as to be truly
representative"
The Democratic plank says:
ITO effect such repeal We demand
that the Congress Immediately propose
q constitutional amendment to truly
representative conventions in the States
called to act solely on that proposal"
The question of what is truly repre-
sentative" is left unanswered by both
parties and leaves the constitutional
lawyers equally in the dark, for there
Is no precedent on which to gauge the
future Not since the original ratif1ca-
ton of the Constitution by the 13
States in separate State convention has
this process been used. Every amend
ment to the Constitution since the
original document was framed has been
ratified by the duly elected Legislatures
Of the different States.
Method Not Clear.
The objection to the State Legisla-
lures ratification has been raised by
vets, who feel that the drys were able
TO dominate State Legislatures through
the alleged inequality Of representation
as be,ween cisies and rural districts.
But the same issue now is presented in
the problem of how delegates to State
conventions shall be chosen.
No machinery exists in any State
that can be specifically said to apply
to the ratification of amendments TO
the FeGe-al Constitution, though in
many instances States have provided
by their own constitutions as to how
con?entions shall be called to deal with
changes in State constitutions. Even
this machinery has been under criticism
In several cases as allowing unfair
representation.
Senator Bingham of Connecticut,
Republican. sensing the possible con-
troversy, introduced a proposal for
repeal of the eighteenth amendment
which new proposal, he stipulated,
should be ratified by conventions in
three-fourths of the several States,
which convention shall be composed in
each State of delegates selected by a
majority vote of the electors of the
States"
Mr.. Bingham plainly declared that
his purpose was to prevent gerry