Evening star., 1932-01-26
People Deserve Chance
to Decide Problem,
Beck Declares.
Urges Bill.

| speech in the National RADIO Forum
last night follows:
Fellow citizens: The question to be
! discussed is a very simple one. 1t does
not involve the merits or dement's Of
| the eighteenth amendment. 1t only
| involves the right of the American
people, II they so desire, to give new
mandate in the matter of prohibition.
| Those who oppose such resubmission
must do SO on the theory that this
provision of the Constitu. IN is final
| ity for all time. Those who favor such
| reSubmission believe that the American
| people have an inviolable and ever
| continuing right to determine. from
| gen ration to generation, the nature OF
| their Government. If they have not
| such right then democracy is fraud
| and deluSion.
In a democratic form of government
| even the Constitution cannot foreclose
! any subject from discussion and action
| by the people, and its amending article,
| Article 5, clearly shows that thue who
| framed the Constitution did not regard
| any who suggested amendments as
wanting in patriotism.
It is strange, indeed, that prohtbl-
| tioniStS should now claim infallibility
| for the eighteenth amendment, for
clearly they did not regard the Consti-
tuition as Interchangeable when they
added the eighteenth amendment and
thus destroyed that basic principle OF
the Constitution-local self government.
If their Inconsistency in this respect
! proves nothing, yet l can invoke the
elementary principles of our Govern
ment and the nobleSt of American
traditions to prove that the American
people have regarded as the funda-
mental verify of liberty the right to
change their form of government, as
and when the interests Of the people
| might require it.
Turns to Constitution.
We regard the immortal Declaration
of Independence as the Magma Charta
of our liberties, and in its noble pre-
amble Thomas Jefferson voiced forever,
to use his language, the Self-evident
truth" that governments are instituted
among men deriving their just powers
from the consent of the governed; that
whenever any form of government be-
comes destructive of these ends 1t Is
the tight Of the people to alter and
abolish it." To the same end the i'm
mortal preamble to the Constitution
proclaims, as with the sonorous blast
Of trumpet, that I'VE, the people Of
tIlG Cll4lCd CSobCo Wv Va NSAAA eNAiN
establish this Constitution" and thus
asserted a then novel truth-that
sovereignty rested neither in the King
nor in the state, but always and in
violably in the people, who had inde-
feasible and eVer-continuing right to
determine their own destiny.
The Constitution itself recognizes
such right, for by article S, under
which the eighteenth amendment itself
was enacted, express and alternative
provisions were made for amendments
from time to time and it was one of
the many arguments which the pro-
ponentS of the Constitution made to the
American people in the immortal Fed
earliest papers, that more liberal method
had been devised in the Constitution to
remedy any defects in its provisions
which experience might show from time
to time.
Nineteen amendments have thus been
adopted, and while a few Of these we're
merely additions to the original Con-
stitution, yet most of them, as, for
example, the eleventh, sixteenth, seven
teenth, eighteenth and nineteenth
amendments, involved important modi-
fcationS and Ear-reaching changes in
the Constitution of the fathers None
involved a greater change than the
eighteenth amendment, for it not only
wrote code of penal law into the
Constitution, but in large part destroyed
the reserved police powers of the States
Argues for Referendum.
How, then, can it be contended that
the American people have not the right
to determine whether any part Of their
Constitution, and especially any amend
ment, should be either repealed or modi-
fed? To assert otherwise is to chal-
lenge democracy itself. 1t makes the
final passage of Lincoln's Gettysburg
address a rhapsody Of words, for If the
American people cannot undo clearly
demonstrated folly, and resume previ-
ously reserved right, then truly gov
ernment for the people, by the people
and of the people" has perished from
the United States.
Such was the reasoning of the pro-
/ ponents of the eighteenth amendment,
when it was submitted to the people
for their ratification, and If time per-
mitted. could quote the principal ad-
VocateS OF such submission as stating
that to deny the people of this country
| the right to ratify the eighteenth
amendment was to challenge their right
to rule themselves, and yet today we
are told by the same moral enthusiasts
that such right should now be denied
the American people. In the vehemence
| Of such denial the fanaticsl "drys"
shut their eyes TO the unquestioned
facts Of history, for when we advocate
the resubmission OF the eighteenth
amendment to conventions in the sew
eral States, to be especially called to
consider the question, we are told, in
a recent statement of the Board of
Temperance and Public Morals, that
such method is 'untried," and yet the
fact is that the original Constitution
was ratified by such conventions and
not by the legislatures
To give the people of the United
States such an opportunity of self
expression, my associates and I, of both
parties, have submitted substitute for
the eighteenth amendment, which,
while giving to every State the right to
determine how it will regulate or pro-
hibit the traffic in beverage liquors ex-
clusiyely within its own borders, yet
gives to the dry States not only their
reserved rights, but the added power
of the Federal Government to protect
them in the full enforcement of their
prohibitory laws. In other words, we
CONTINUED on Tenth Page)