WET-DRY INQUIRY ENDS IN U.S.A.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17830, 26 April 1926, Page 15

WET-DRY INQUIRY ENDS IN U.S.A.

FINAL TESTIMONY GIVEN BY LEADERS. By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Cop3 r right. Aus. and X.Z. Cable Association. WASHINGTON, April 23. Mayor Devor, of Chicago, again testified before the Senate Committee and criticised some judges who do not believe in prohibition. He said that in sections of the country which do not believe in the law, even the judges refuse to enforce it. “That is the case in certain sections of Chicago. There are wards in which no man can be elected if he favours the Volstead Act.” Mr Devor complained that prohibition was a too absorbing topic and said: “Our attention is engrossed from morning until night. It is almost impossible to give good government when we are immersed in this question. It takes up too much of our tirrie." General Lincoln Andrews, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury and chief prohibition enforcement officer, again testified. lie stated that the satisfactory application of the law could not be fully effective until Congress adopts legislation which he has proposed. General Andrews claimed that the coastguard made liquor-running unprofitable, and he hoped to make illicit manufacture the same. The “Wets” and the “Drvs" have closed their cases before the Senate committee. Mr Wayne Wheeler, the Anti-Saloon League chief, declared that that the investigation had disclosed that prohibition had wrought financial, economic and moral betterment of the country. He said that what was needed now was legislation to tighten instead of weaken the Volstead Act. Mr Julian Cadman. the “Wets” attorney. ended with a plea for modififieation. He said the time had come when Congress must consider the best way to get out of the terrible mess into which this ill-considered legislation had plunged them. They must attempt to correct the evils which madmen—the prohibitionists—had brought upon them.. G-eneral Lincoln Andrews testified and amplified his previous statement. He said he did not advocate any change towards legalising light beer The committee agreed that each side should have ten days in which to file written briefs. Both sides completed their evidence on Saturday in the spectacular prohibition battle which iias marred other activities of the legislative branch of the Government for three weeks. The arguments closed with a wide gulf separating the opponents and proponents of prohibition modification. The sub-committee of the Senate Prohibition Committee now takes the re.cords in hand to do with as it wishes.