Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1933-01-09
The Senate Repeal Plan.


-, the 1sth amendment, if the Senate
receives it in the form agreed upon
nv the subcommittee which drafted H.
denarts in one important respect from
the platform pledges Of both pohtical
parties. 1t proposes submitting 'lie
question to State Legislatures Hsteao
of to state conventions. Tnose VINO
onnose the resolution because IN TINS
resnect it repudiates party platforms
stand. Of course. on tenable ground. But
with the gains registered In wet SEN
t;ment. the question no longer pre-
serts the burning issue that 1t once
did 1t will not make great oeal
of difference, in the end, wnetner
ratification Is asked Of Legislatures OF
conventions.
The really important thing Is the
Gown, of repeal that the States-whether
bv Legislatures or conventlons-ai
asked to ratify. The Judiciary Commit
tees subcommittee, which drafted Vne
resolution. has agreed on very rea-
sonable compromise.
Both parties have insisted on protec-
ton of dry States against wet ota'eS
and have guaranteed to fight the return
of the saloon. The main division ne-
tween the Republican platform ana the
Democratic platform. and the DIVISION
now between the extreme vets anu tne
dry element agreeable to modification,
is whether these bans should be wrlS-
ten into the Constitution, or wnethel
available Federal legislation, to protect
the dry States from the wet States,
should be utilized and the outlawry OF
the saloon left entirely to the States.
The compromise repeal resolution
fiatly prohibits, by new constitutional
amendment, the shipment Of liquors
into States or Territories or Feoeral
possessions In violation Of local laws.
This. 1t will be argued, Is supererogatory'
inasmuch as Congress already possesses
necessary authority to prevent sucn
shipments. But that authority, before
the 18th amendments adoption, was
not exercised to the material pene-
ft of the dry States. Had II Deem
no exercised, and had dry States which
wished to protect themselves against
wet States been adequately equipped TO
do it and adequately assisted by the
Federal Government, there might not
have been the demand for the 18TH
AAA4K Iva
amendment. The merit OF retaining
that provision in the Constitution
Is the moral obligation that thus
would be imposed upon the Fed
eral Government to enforce const-
tutional prohibition. 1t is guarantee
in other words, that what has been
agreed upon by all as desirable Will be
done as far as it is possible. 1t is. in
addition. q sort of bulwark against the
sort of pressure from the liquor inter-
ests that would assert itself once the
traffic were legalized.
Still more CT compromise, however,
Is found In the section Of the proposed
amendment relating to the saloon. This
merely gives to Congress the power to
legislate on the matter Of regulating
and prohibiting the sale Of liquor Ito
be drunk on the premises where sold"
This is eminently reasonable. If, as
the vets have argued. the States them
selves will quickly outlaw the saloon and
guard against its return without Federal
intervention, it is possible that the Fed
eral Government need not utilize its
constitutionally derived power to assist
them. But suppose the States, In the
first flush of reaction against prohibit
ton, undertake variety of experiments
that In some cases will work and In
some cases will not work, resulting in
q crazy-quilt type of regulation over the
saloon, entrenching the worst features
of liquor traffic run for private profit
and leading to border-town evils from
which dry States will suffer. 1t is con-
ceivable that conditions identical with
those preceding the adoption Of the
18th amendment would reappear.
The advantage of such a section in
the Constitution lies in the fact that
should majority of the people demand
Federal regulation and concurrent en-
forcement against the saloon, it would
be gained. But if the States themselves
continue to be satisfied Of their own
ability to control the saloon and ma
jority of the people in truth resented
iy,fa Oft
would be left to themselves.
The Senate resolution is aSsuredly
more logical than the resolution for
naked repeal which failed to get a two
thirds vote in the House. 1t is, in gen.
eral, the type of resolution that will
enable the people to hold the gains
made under prohibition without resort
ing TO hurtful extremes and attempting
to throw the whole business overheard.
The adoption Of the 18th amendment
was revolutionary, and as revolutions
"never move backward" the Senate
resolution is probably the sort of reso-
luton that in the end will be submitted
and probably ratified.
Those of the drys who believe that
II the 18th amendment is either repeal
ed or vitality amended. as proposed,
return Of the saloon cannot be pre-
vented and effective protection Of the
dry against the wet States win become
impossible, will continue. of course, to
oppose with all their might the amend
ipent-ratifying vote of threerfourths Of
- States: and many Of ttssa are con-