Evening star., 1933-01-16

Proposal in the United States Senate
for repeal of the eighteenth amend
ment is subjected to severe criticism
for failure to carry out the pledges OF
the two major political parties. Particu-
lar objection Is offered to the proyis-
ion for ratification by Legislatures IN
stead Of by conventions, while protec-
ton of dry States and authorization OF
Federal legislation against the saloon
are believed by some to promise pro-
longed political agitation. Defenders Of
the resolution hold that 1t goes as far
as is likely to gain the approval Of q
sufficient number Of States to effect
the desired reform.
1T is a reputation" says the Balt-
more Sun, 'of the pledge in the plat
form Of the Democratic party, .npon
which the election was won. The
pledge was that the question Of repeal
should be submitted to conventions.
State Legislatures would not be
chosen solely on the issue Of repeal."
That paper finds further violation OF
the party platform by retaining con-
current power in Congress to regulate
or prohibit the sale Of Intoxicating
liquors to be drunk on the premises
where sold,'" provision containing
o.
the United States which the Demo-
cratic party is pledged to eliminate"
The Uniontown Herald maintains that
both parties, In the recent campaign,
supported State conventions" which
that paper terms "the only sane,
sensible and non-partisian manner in
which to decide the question"
THE people voted Overwhelmingly
for repeal of the eighteenth amend
ment," declares the Portland. Greg,
Journal, "as pledged in the Democratic
platform" Convinced that the section
of the measure relating to the saloon
in national politics." while the mind
of a majority of the American people
Is fixed on getting liquor out of
national politics" the New York Sun
holds that mo half-measures will do"
The Sun also believes that there will
be no patience with the clause in this
resolution which would require its
ratification by the State Legislatures"
The Roanoke World-News argues: 1.-THE
objectionable features Of concurrent
police powers and of legislation in the
Constitution have already been pointed
out. Their retention in the proposed
amendment merely furnishes another
Illustration Of the unwillingness OF the
Federal authority to give back to the
States any of the powers 1t has un-
wisely usurped"
Referring to the action Of the Senate
Judiciary Committee, the Buffalo Eve
ming News suggests that "it Is not what
the wet leaders want; 1t Is what they
can get" In explanation, the News
continues: Always it Is to be remem-
bered that three -fourths of the States
must line up to repeal the eighteenth
amendment. To put the case In an
other way, Is Safes can keep the
amendment in the Constitution. And
more than that number were dry before
prohibition became part of the basic
law. If the Democratic ticket was sue
cessfu1 in more than 36 States it does
not follow chat all the States carried by
Roosevelt and Garner are prepared to
fall In line for repeal. The vote ON the
Garner resolution indicated the uncer-
tainty OF things. It may be that Con-
gress-if not the one now sitting. then
the next-will decide to accept the
compromise amendment reported by the
judiciary subcommittee as promising
somewhat better than half loaf"
=
while the House has already defeated
repeal" says the Oakland Tribune ST
Is to be remembered the measure called
for outright action, with no assurance