Evening star., 1933-09-10
After Repeal-What!


One sometimes wonders why drys, In
Guiding such brilliant orators ana souho
statesmen as Senator Sheppard, should
fight so strenuously and increasingly IN
the apparently lost cause OF national
prohibition.
Thoughtful drys understand the sit
uation, but fight as desperately against
repeal of the amendment as II the final
issue were still doubtful.
Why? Because, it may be imagined,
there is danger that the Overwhelming
rush toward repeal Of national pro-
hibition will sweep State prohibition
also into the discard.
The National Government is not
committed against State prohibition,
only against national prohibition.
Recovery under the New Deal re-
quires only repeal Of national prohioi-
ton.
The demand in the recent elections
was that the Nation should not inter-
fere with State rights. The Nation
must no longer, it was claimed, prohibit
or enforce prohibition. That issue
must be left to the States; and II the
State decided for prohibition and de-
clared that it would remain dry, the
future National Government was
pkdged in effect land the 2lst amend
ment pledges the Nation specifically
to protect the dry State in its dryness.
The influence of the National Gov
ernment is thus reversed. 1t is pledged
to repeal prohibition by the Nation, but
to protect prohibition in the State. II
decided to be desirable by the State.
Also, If the State decides for cor
troll of the liquor traffic instead OF pro-
hibition either by the State or by coun-
ties under the local option system, both
the political parties are pledged against
the return OF the saloon by their party
platforms.
The prediction and platform prom
ises. if kept in good faith, should facili-
tate the coming together for State pro-
hibition or for rigid control by the
State of the liquor traffic Of all, wheth-
er so-called vets or so-called drys, who
recognize the danger, the evil and the
curse Of alcoholism and OF the old-time
saloon system.
Indeed, the anti-saloon vets are un
der a distinct obligation to take the
lead in the fight within the respective
States against the return of the saloon
with its attendant evils.
Their claim was that national prohi-
bition, unenforced and unenforcible, did
not promote temperance, but intem-
perance and crime, and the reign with
profit of the bootlegger, and that the
real temperance folk were the advocates
of repeal.
The drys retorted that the response
bility for bootlegging and the criminal
bootlegger with his machine gun and
his smoke screen was not upon the law,
but upon those of us who refused to
obey or enforce the law, and whose
purchase Of unlawful liquor from the
bootlegger made bootlegging profitable,
supplied the funds which armed the
bootlegger against the National Gov
ernment and its agents and made us
accessories to the murder of agents of
our Government, killed by our own
agents whom We had hired to bring
to us. in defiance Of law, the means of
gratifying our uncomfortable thirst for
alcohol
But whoever or whatever was re-
sponsible for the bootlegger, it is clear
that all. both vets and drys, are now
in honor combined against him and
against the kidnapping and racketeer-
ing to which the bootleggers have been
driven.
Before national prohibition thirty
three of the States had State prohibi
ton. How many Of these States will
retain and enforce their voluntary pro-
hibition laws? How many will sweep
out State prohibition along with ma
tional prohibition in spite of the fact
that such action is not part of Presi-
dent Roosevelt's New Deal?
Undoubtedly the Presidents appeal
for ratification Of the repeal Of the
18th amendment contributed largely
to effect the repeal. Will he not
find it fair play to declare that his
appeal does not extend to repeal Of the
State prohibition laws or to resistance
to the enactment of new State prohi-
bition laws: And to declare that those
States which have now such laws on
the statute books or shall re-enact
them are an integral part of the New
DeaP' to be protected by the National
Government against overflow Of alcohol
from the wet States?
And will not the President also de-
clare that to prevent the return Of the
saloon is as much a part Of his per-
sonaI pledge and of the New Deal" a
to repeal the 18th amendment? And
will he not urge the people, both the
vets and drys. to combine and CO.
operate with him to prevent the return
Of the evils Of the oId-time saloon, evils
political, industrial and moral?
And since the repeal Of the 18th
amendment has, it is claimed by some
and conceded by some, driven the ex-
bootlegger into kidnapping and racketeer-
ing, will not the President continue the
campaign. already 50 vigorously begun
arninst kidnapers and racketeers?
The churches can heartily cooperate
with the President and can reasonably
EXPECT his sincere cooperation in:
1. Protecting States dry by their OWE
choice against alcoholic overflow from
vet States.
&. campaign TO prevent the re'