Evening star., 1932-06-26

stead of saying, as the Republicans did,
that the question of amending the Con-
stitution should be submitted. But to do
that commits the party in favor CT a
matter that many Of its members can
not support.
The Real Battle.
But 1t is in Bishop Cannon's fourth
and fifth points that the real battle will
be fought by the Democrats.
VIII the Democrats declare for an
amendment nakedly repeating the eight
zenith, or for an amendment which
amends the eighteenth amendment by
proposing a substitute?
Until few weeks ago there were only
few advocates of the wet cause who
openly suggested naked repeal Of the
eighteenth amendment, that is. re-
peal that was not accompanied by some
substitute. A few persons, like DR..
Butler OF Columbia University and Gov.
Ritchie of Maryland and ex-senator
Reed Of Missouri have been for repeal
from the very beginning. But the ma
jority of vets, who looked at the prob
lem from the point of view of the man
who wanted the right to have his drink
or leave 1t alone. who recognized the
evils OF the saloon and was not par
ttcularly concerned with the principle
or theory of constitutional prohibition,
was willing enough to have the eight
eenth amendment modified" to give
him what he wanted, but not re
pealed" to bring back all the evils Of
the saloon.
In Chicago the ranks OF the repeal
lists. however, were suddenly swelled to
such strength that the movement for
substitutionless repeal threatened to run
away with things. The adopted plank
obviously represented a compromise.
And now the Democrats are about to
meet, with the same demand tor re
peal' overshadowing everything else.
Senator Borah has contended. in sub
stance. that the battle between "modi-
fication" and repeal" is mere battle
of words and that both mean the same
thing, which is repeal"
The real ISSUE however, Is whether
the proposed change of the eighteenth
amendment would sweep away all
Federal control Of liquor traffic, or
whether it will leave in the Con-
stitution a measure of national control
sufficient to protect the dry States
against the wet States and to protect
the people of all the States against the
return of the saloon.
4lIC INCpuOhCdll plain ldNOAS lAllo
latter method. 1t says that the amend
ment, while retaining In the Federal
Government power to preserve the gains
already made in dealing with the evils
inherent in the liquor traffic, shall allow
States to deal with the problem as their
citizens may determine. but subject al
ways to the power Of the Federal Gov
ernment to protect those States where
prohibition may exist and safeguard
our citizens everywhere from the return
of the saloon and attendant abuses"
Senator Morrow's Plan Recalled.
That is the general policy that has
been advanced, up to this time, by most
of those men classified as vets. 1t is
not unlike the plan proposed by the
late Senator Morrow, who, in opening
his campaign for the Republican sena-
torial nomination in New Jersey, stated
his position as follows:
I believe that the way out Of the
present difficulty Is to recognize
clearly the fundamental difference
between the nature of the Federal
Government and the State govern
ment. I believe this involves a re-
peal OF the eighteenth amendment
and the substitution therefor of an
amendment which will restore to the
ObdlCo JIC POWCL W lIlelI
policy toward the liquor traffic and
vest in the Federal Government
power to give all possible protection
and assistance to those States that
desire complete prohibition against
invasion from the State that does
not.
l do not believe that the funda-
mental difficulty can be reached by
an amendment Of the Volstead act.
So long as the eighteenth amend
ment and the statutes Hereunder
are the law of the land. favor gen.
erous appropriations for their en-
forcement. I favor the use of such
appropriation in the first place for
that portion Of enforcement which is
pre-eminently the duty of the Fed
eral Government. This means that
the Federal Government would first
direct It's efforts to keeping liquor
from coming into the country and
to keeping liquor from passing into
interstate commerce.
In the battle for a great social re-
form there was wisdom in the old
system OF experimenting in 48 labora-
tories rather than in one.
In the foregoing discus
sion have tried to avoid the words
wet" and dry" 1t does not help
much in solution of a problem to
label men. Men labeled wet may be
as much opposed to the saloon as
men labeled dry.
The saloon must not come back.
The people of the United States are
rid OF the saloon-and well rid OF it.
But in the process of ridding our
selves OF the saloon a wholly TN
regulated liquor traffic has grown
up In this country. One group
| hlaT1pS m L.
1t is not in such a spirit that a So
luton will be found.
The solution will be found when
we realize that the issue before us
Is Government problem
Personal Liberty" Not Involved.
Senator Morrow disposed of the per
sonal liberty" issue that Is so often
raised In the prohibition discussion. 1.-THE
control OF liquor has for a long time
been one Of the difficult problems of
all governments" he said. There are
people who believe that the prohibition
OF intoxicating liquors under any cir
cumstanceS by any government is an
infringement on the right of the indi-
vidual to lead his own life in his own
way. DO not share that view. 1t has
peen generally recognized that all gov
, ernments may protect a man against
his own propensities If the injury to the
community Is sufficient to warrant the
interference with individual liberty. The
r prohibition movement is a recognition
OF this principle. It is not a new
movement. ."
Senator MCTows plan could easily
have been the basis for the Republican
plank. His plan at the time won COM
mendation from the same element that
!, row condemns the Republican plank
for not going far enough.
= Ex-Gov. Smiths Former Plan.
; For that matter, 1t Is interesting to
compare the Republican PLANK with
: former Gov. Smiths statement Of pro-
hioition principles in accepting the
Democratic nomination four years ago.
r He said:
Some relief would come from an