Prohibition in America.

Press, Volume LV, Issue 16507, 26 April 1919, Page 8

Prohibition in America.

There is somo confusion in the minds of a good many peoplo as to the exact position in the United States regarding prohibition. The belief that nationwide prohibition will come into forceon July Ist of this ;/ear is correct, ho far as it goes, but this is tho result of a clause in the Food Production Stimulation Act passed by Congress in tho latter part of last year, and it is loaded with a condition. Tho clause provided that after June 30th, 1919, national prohibition should be in forco until the President should proclaim the end of demobilisation. It was a war measure pure and simplo, and if the conclusion of demobilisation is announced before Juno 30 th, which admittedly is not probable, it would presumably be of no effect. The authority undor which a majority of the State Legislatures hnve in the past twelvo or fifteen months voted nation-wido prohibition was quite> different from this piece of war legislation. It was a resolution of Congress in favour of an amendment to tho Constitution of the United States, and wqs adopted in December, 1917. The amendment ran as follows:—

Section I.—After ono year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into or tho exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to tho jurisdiction thereof? for beverage purposes is prohibited. Sootion 2.—Tho Congress and tho several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. "Section 3.—This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the Legislatures of the several States as provided by tro Constitution within soven years from tho date of rhe submission thereof to the States by the I Congress.

By tho provisions of the Constitution such an amendment became law if and when three-fourths of the total number of States voted in favour of it through their Legislatures. There are fortyeight States in the Union. Fifteen of them ratified the amendment during 191S, and twenty-one more by January ICth this year, Nebraska being the thirty-sixth State to vote for it and thereby complete the necessary threefourths majority. Before the end of the month eight other States had followed suit, 2J«w York being the forty-

fourth to take sides "with the ''dry?.' . By the terms of the amendment, prohibition over tho -whole of the States should begin on January 16th next year, exactly a year after Nebraska s ratification, but it appears that to mako ratification complete the Secretary oi -State has to be notified of it by ?och State, and only a few of the" ratifying Slates hdd fulfilled that condition by tho date mentioned, so that the comins of prohibition will be delayed by a few '.veeks at least.

But tho fijilit is probably not nearly over when nil tho legal technicalities nercssnry for the ratification of the amendment to the Constitution are completed. These do not concern Congress ; all that is necessary when the Secretary of Stnte is oHxiaily infoir.ird of the action of the ratifying States is for him to announce tho da to wlun prohibition "will come into force. But tho

States are, as we have shown, in no hurry to certify to their votes. As a matter of fact, many, if not all, oi ■them, can, under their individual Constitutions, rescind within a year tho ratifying action of their Legislatures, and it is believed in some quarters that tho returning soldiers may forco a change of front, either through referendu:ns or by directly influencing tho Legislatures of some States. If only forty-four of those have ratified tho amendment —which was tho case "when the last mail left —and nine of them can be induced to rescind their vote during the year, tho necessary "dry ,, majority will not have been attained. It is at least possible that this will happen. The final sweep of prohibition, which, as one observer remarks, made a reality with a rush in less than a week of tho impossible of ten years ago, was perhaps too rapid for permanence, especially as it was undoubtedly favoured by the temporary measures of restriction adopted as war measures by Congress and numerous individual States. During the interval that must elapse before the amendment can become law people will have more time to reflect on what it may mean to destroy a, trade in which some three hundred millions sterling of capital is invested, which yielded the Federal Government in the? last ordinary year £56,000,000 of revenue mid under war conditions £1G0,000,0C0, besides £20,000,000 revenue for States, cities, and counties, which gave employment to more than 100,000 workers, and paid them somo £19,000,000 a year in wages. It is inevitable that the interests involved wilt go to the Courts, for already American jurists are differing widely as to the constitutional legality of what is known as the "bone-dry law." In any case Congress has yet to frame the legislation providing for the enforcement of the amendment. Tho latter is ineffective as it stands. Sinco it provides no penalty for infractions, it is an unloaded gun. The passage of that law through Congress, wo may "bo sure, will be fought with all the bitterness that might be expected to gather round such a contest, and if enforcing legislation has also to bo passed by the ratifying States, a point which does not seem quite clear, the conEict will be intensified and prolonged. The hostile attitude of Labour to Prohibition, embodied .in th.« "slognn." "No beer, "no work," is also a factor in the situation which may have far-reaching effects. America was certainly the first great nation to vote herself "dry," but she has not yet attained that state.