AMERICAN PROHIBITION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21241, 23 January 1931, Page 7

AMERICAN PROHIBITION

THE WICKERSHAM REPORT. INTERFERENCE ALLEGED. (United Press Association.) (By Electric Telegraph—Copyright.) WASHINGTON, January 21. (Received Jan. 22, at 11 p.m.) The Wickersham report has stirred a tremendous uproar throughout the United States, and the commissioners’ finding has apparently not settled the question, but has emphasised it more. Newspapers are crammed with varying comment, as both the “ wets ” and the “ drys ” claim that the report aids their respective causes. The principal present results would seem to be definite knowledge that President Hoover is wholeheartedly “ dry,” and a widening of the split between the “ wets ” and the “ drys ” in the Republican ranks. Certain critics contend that while the plan is superficially “ dry ” it fundamentally opposes prohibition, and they assert that President Hoover was forced to temper the recommendations so that they would appeal to both factions. It is suggested that the President forced the submittal of a general anti-repeal plea in order not to be “ left out on the limb ” by his own commission, the members of which individually asked in tow cases for direct repeal, in five cases for modification, and in four for a further trial. As rumours continued to spread throughout the day that the President had interfered with the commission, even allegedly dictating the withdrawal from the report of a statement for the revision of the Eighteenth Aemendment, excitement in political circles increased. - Sena-, tor Tydings introduced a resolution calling on Mr Wickersham to appear before the Judiciary Committee and explain whether “ outside influence ” was exerted upon the commission. Mr Wickersham has also issued a statement that the report that the “ President had persuaded the commission to abandon a tentative agreement in favour of a revision of the Eighteenth Amendment is absolutely untrue and without foundation.” White House, moreover, took cognisance of the situation and although it would say nothing formally it sponsored the statement that the President’s position on the Wickersham report is misunderstood, and that he is not opposed to revision; only to revision along the lines outlined in the report—namely, conferring power upon Congress to regulate or prohibit the liquor trafiic, as against the present provisions for prohibition only.