OCR Interpretation


The American issue. [volume] (Westerville, Ohio) 1912-19??, November 07, 1919, Image 1

Image and text provided by University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library, Urbana, IL

Persistent link: https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn2008060406/1919-11-07/ed-1/seq-1/

What is OCR?


Thumbnail for

NOV 14
IllinoisEdition «2
1 - W
Volume XIV. . WESTERVILLE. OHIO. FRIDAY. NOVEMBER 7, 1919 Number 22 ~ >
CONGRESS PASSES ENFORCEMENT
MEASURE OVER PRESIDENT’S VETO
WITHIN TWENTY-FOUR HOURS
House Acts Within Three Hours After Message Is Received
^ ^ Announcing Veto; Bill Not Debated
7 '
SENATE DEBATES BILL SEVERAL HOURS
THEN iS SAME OVER VETO 65 TO 20
President’s Objection to Bill Referred to Enforcement of War-Time
Prohibition
DECISIVE VOTE IN CONGRESS INDICATES PROHIBITION SUCCESS
On the afternoon of Monday. October 27th. President 3\ilson vetoed the
Prohibition Enforcement Bill. Within three hours the House of Repre
sentatives repassed the measure over the veto by a \ote of 176 to 55. This
was 21 more than the two-thirds majority needed. On Tuesday at 3:40 p. in-,
the Senate repassed the bill by a vote of 65 to 20; eight more than the neces
sary two-thirds majority. Experts dilTcr on the question of whether the bill
became law from the moment of the Senate action or later in the afternoon
of the same day when the Secretary of the Senate certified the action of the
House and the Senate to the Secretary of Stale together with the engrossed
i copy of the act.
s How Illinois Men Voted
\ Illinois Representatives voting toj
* override the President’s veto were:!
Brooks, Cannon. Denison, Kullcr,;
Graham, King. Wheeler, Williams and
Wilson. To sustain the veto: Juul,!
Madden and Gallagher. In the Sen-1
itc both Senators—McCormick and i
Sherman—voted to override ’the veto.:
There was considerable excitement j
in the House immediately after the \
reading of the President’s message.,
Representative .Volstead, who had the]
bill in charge, moved that the con
sideration of the message vetoing the;
bill be postponed until the following
Thursday. The vote on this motion i
was not taken until several hours]
later. The point of no quorum was
raised several times, making it neces
sary to close the doors arid notify1
absentees. Several times the motion
to adjourn was made and voted down.
After several roll calls on subsidiary
~t ~ motions the motion to postpone con
I sideration was voted down, thus
y bringing the. President’s veto up for
immediate action. There was no dis
cussion on the merits of the bill.
Senators Debate Prohibition
The Senate was debating the peace
treaty when the enforcement bill was
, received from the House. Several
*" Senators objected to taking up the j
President's veto message on the ;
ground that to do so would delay
consideration of the peace treaty.
After considerable discussion, led by '
Senator Underwood, by the wets and !
by Senator Sterling in favor of inline- j
diate consideration, the Senate pro-;
ceeded to debate the bill. In reply
to Senator Underwood’s remarks in
which lie spoke of the President’s;
recommendation to repeal the war
Prohibition law, Senator Sterling said.
"Tlte Congress did not see fit to act
upon the President’s recommendation
and the silence of Congress ami the
failure of Congress to respond to the
recommendation of tlie President, I
am satisfied, met with the approval
of the people of the United States,
and no act or failure to act on the j
part of the Senate or the Congress of;
the United States has met with
greater approval than the refusal to
comply with the request of the Presi
dent to repeal the war Prohibition!
act.” Senator Jones called attention,
to the fact that each branch of Con- j
gress by large majorities voted down '
* the proposition to repeal war-time
Prohibition. Senator Sterling also;
-*read from a letter by the Attorney
General in which lie said, referring
to the passage of the bill: “I do not;
think the wisdom of sucli action on ]
the part of Congress admits of a!
doubt.”
A Question of Enforcement
Senator Sheppaid said that the:
President’s veto could not repeal the ;
war-time Prohibition act. "The only]
question before us,” he said, “is the i
question of its effective enforcement.
There never was a time when Prohi-!
bition was more imperatively needed
than in this hour of general unrest
and economic confusion.”
The question of whether or not the
war is over was debated at length.
Senator Norris summed up the argu
ment in support of his contention that
K war Prohibition is still in effect as
follows: The President has no au
thority whatever to issue his procla
im mation until two things occur. One
fijU must be the conclusion of the present
, war and the other must be llentobili-1
zation.
Senator Lodge, who lias always1
been opposed to Prohibition laws, de-i
^ clared that he would vote to override
P
the President's veto. He said: “I
think at this time to prevent this hill
from becoming a law in the present
disturbed conditions of the country
would be a great misfortune."
The President's message vetoing
the law enforcement hill was as fol
lows :
The Veto Message
"To the House of Representatives:
"I am returning without my signa
ture H. R. 6810, 'an act to prohibit
intoxicating beverages and to regu
late the manufacture, production, use,
and sale of high proof spirits for other
than beverage purposes, and to insure
an ample supply of alcohol and pro
mote its use in scientific research ami
in the development of fuel, dye and
other lawful industries.'
"The subject matter treated in this
measure deals with two distinct phases
ol Prohibition legislation. One part
of the act under consideration sicks
to enforce war-time Prohibition. The
other provides for the enforcement
which was made necessary by the
adoption of the constitutional amend
ment. I object to and can not ap
prove that part of this legislation with
reference to war-time Prohibition.
"It has to do with the enforcement
of an act which was passed by reason
of the emergencies of the war and
whose objects have been satisfied in
the demobilization of the army and
navy and whose repeal I have already
sought at the hands of Congress.
Where the purposes of particular leg
islation arising out of war emergency
have been satisfied, sound public pol
icy makes clear the reason and neces
sity for repeal.
“It will not be difficult for Congress
in considering this important matter
to separate these two questions and
effectively to legislate regarding them,
making the proper distinction between
temporary causes which arose out of
the war-time emergencies and those
like the constitutional amendment of
Prohibition, which is now part of the
fundamental law of the country.
“In all matters having to do with
the personal habits and customs of
large numbers of our people we must
be certain that the established pro
cesses of legal change are followed.
In no other way can the salutary ob
ject sought to he accomplished by
great reforms of this character he
made satisfactory and permanent.
“Woodrow Wilson.
“The White House, Oct. 27, 1919.”
History of the Enforcement Bill
July 22, passed the House 287 to
100. September 5, passed the Senate
by viva voce vote. October 8, amend
ed bill as reported by conference com
mittee passed Senate by viva voce
vote. October 12, passed House 321
to 70. October 27, vetoed by Presi
dent. Same day. repassed by House
176 to 55. October 28 repassed by
Senate 65 to 20.
15 YEARS ADDED TO LIFE,
SAYS DR. MAYO
New York, Oct. 20.—Progress
in surgery and medico-thera
peutics since the Civil War have
added 15 years to human life,
Dr. William Mayo, of Roches
ter, Minn., told the American
Congress of Surgeons at the
Waldorf-Astoria Hotel tonight.
With continued progress, he
added, and aided by the elimi
nation of liquors and wines, 15
years more would be added.—
Chicago Herald-Examiner.
Help Keep America Dry Between Peace
and January 16
The war ban against liquors may be lifted. It is an
nounced from Washington that war Prohibition will be de
clared at an end with the ratification of the peace treaty. This
may leave an interval between war Prohibition and January'
16, when Constitutional Prohibition goes into effect. IN
STANT ACTION IS IMPERATIVE TO PREVENT THE
SALE OF INTOXICANTS DURING THE POSSIBLE
PERIOD BETWEEN PEACE AND PERMANENT PRO
HIBITION.
FROM EVERYWHERE IN ILLINOIS resolutions, pe
titions and personal letters should be sent to Congress urging
the passage of a law which will prevent the sale of intoxicants
during the possible interval between war-time and Constitu
tional Prohibition. Congress has the power to place a tax
on liquors so high that they will not be made or sold. Con
gress also has the power to prohibii the shipment of liquors in
interstate commerce.
IN EVERY CITY AND VILLAGE DRY UNDER
WAR PROHIBITION ONLY the people should protest
against the granting of licenses up to January 16. The mayor
and the council in every place that tvas wet up to July 1 should
be urged to use every legal means yvithin their power to with
hold permits from applicants for liduor selling privileges.
TO PERMIT THE REOPENING OF SALOONS BE
FORE JANUARY 16 WOULD BE A GOVERNMENTAL
i CRIME AND A NATIONAL CALAMITY NO MATTER
HOW BRIEF THE WET PERIOD.
To have the END OF THE WAR marked by a season
of drunken debauchery and a carnival of crime would be a
disgrace to democracy for which the war was fought and won.
To refill our jails with drunkards, to again inflict the hor
rors of drink upon thousands of children, to encourage the
squandering of millions on a worse-than-useless commodity,
to permit EVEN FOR ONE HOUR the resumption of the
outlawed liquor traffic would be a national disgrace.
Claims of the liquor men that they will lose large sums
unless allowed to sell their stocks ARE FALSE. All possi
ble losses caused by unsalable stock are compensated for by
the enormous profits on past sales. THE LIQUOR MEN
WILL LOSE NOTHING EXCEPT THE CHANCE TO
INCREASE THEIR WEALTH.
How many Americans would favor giving Germany the
right to celebrate the ratification of the peace treaty by using
up all the ammunition left when the armistice was signed by
shooting at the people who defeated the Kaiser’s forces?
Such a celebration would increase tfe wealth of the fabulously
rich Krupps—but it would cost many innocent lives.
Why permit the brewers and distillers ";o celebrate the
coming of peace by getting rid of their left-over liquor stocks?
Why permit the liquor traffic to take another shot at the
American people? WHY PERMIT A VANQUISHED EN
EMY TO RESUME THE ATROCITIES FOR WHICH
HE WAS CONQUERED?
WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMAN AND SENATORS
AT ONCE! SEE YOUR MAYOR AND COUNCIL (IF
YOUR TOWN IS WET) IMMEDIATELY. Help hold the
dry lines until Constitutional Prohibition makes the liquor
forces “cease firing” forever.
War-Time Lid
May Be Lifted
An Associated Press dispatch sent
from Washington on October 28 reads
as follows:
“War-time Prohibition will be
brought to an end by presidential
proclamation immediately after the
Senate ratifies the German peace
treaty, it was said today at the White
House.
“Officials explained that the war
time act provided that it should be.
annulled by the President when peace
had been declared and when the army
and navy had been demobilized. Con
gress was informed yesterday by the
President in his message vetoing the
Prohibition enforcement bill that de
mobilization of the army and the
navy had been completed.
“The White House announcement
clears up any doubt as to whether the
war would he ended legally with the
ratification of the German treaty.
Some officials had expressed the opin
ion that the war emergency wotdd not
pass until the treaty with Austria had
been acted upon by the Senate.”
This dispatch emphasizes the im
portance ol‘ quick action on the part
of the people to prevent the deluge
of drink and the orgy of drunken
ness, crime, and distress that would
result if the war Prohibition law
should cease to be effective before
January 16. Take no chances. Move
immediately to protect your commun
ity. See articles elsewhere in this
paper on what to do to insure Pro
hibition until the Constitutional
amendment goes into effect.
The Bolshevist is opposed to all
laws, and the brewers and liquor deal
ers are opposed to all laws restricting
and prohibiting the liquor traffic.
That is the only difference.
These Figures Show Results During First
Three Dry Months
The record of arrests for drunkenness in cities that were wet be
fore July 1st, show why jailers go out on a sympathetic strike when
members of the Bartenders’ Union quit work. In connection with
these figures it must be remembered that the national enforcement
act was not yet in effect.
i --1918 Wet-' t-1919 Dry-v
July Aug. Sept. July Aug. Sept.
Chicago. 3,880 4.170 3,885 2,714 2,347 2,309
Peoria. 150 120 178 15 25 22
East St. Louis .... 3f> 92 85 11 14 8
Cairo. 60 69 78 11 20 31
Joilet. 13 23 22 2 3 2
Kankakee. 13 13 16 .i 4 3
East Dubuque. 60 54 43 1 0 0
| Granite City. 10 6 5 0 1 0
Note—The Chicago Police Department does not classify arrests
for drunkenness separately. The figures for Chicago given above arc
arrests for disorderly conduct under whijeh head arrests for drunken
ness are included.
_
CANADA IS SATISFIED
After three full years' trial
the province of Ontario, Can
ada, is satisfied with Prohibi
tion.
On Monday, October 20, elec
tors voted on four questions:
First. The repeal of the On
tario tempera nee act. meaning
reinstatement of the license sys
tem.
Second. Allowing sale of two
and one-half per cent beer in
government agencies.
Third. Allowing sale of two
and one-half per cent beer in
standard hotels.
Fourth. Allowing ‘•ale of li
quors of all kinds in government
agencies.
Drys Win on Every Proposal
Every question was answered
ill the negative by huge majori
ties. The latest figures are:
For the first proposition, yes,
223,874; no, 508.809; majority,
284,935.
For the second proposition,
yes, 243,802; no, 479,511; major
ity, 258,709.
For the third proposition, yes,
235,193; no. 493,278; majority,
258,085.
For the fourth proposition,
yes, 277,580; no, 453,545; major
ity, 175,965. Dry majorities w ill
be increased when full returns
are received. Question 1 will
have over 300,000 majority;
question 4 about 200,000.

Federal Agents
Act Immediately
Under New Dry Law
Large Quantities of Liquor Sealed
to Prevent Sale

■ Instructions from Washington, i
| signed by Daniel C. Roper, Collector ,
i of Internal Revenue, were received by
George G. Dunlap, chief deputy field '
collector, at Chicago, immediately
up t the 'e■' v -■ p.: •‘he . ■ / r ;:
ment bill over the President’s veto.
The message informed Mr. Dunlap
that the law went into effect at 3:40
! p. m. and should he enforced to the
letter. Immediately Federal raiding
squads were dispatched to all part'
of the city. Thousands of gallons of j
whiskys and wines found in saloon j
cellars and private storehouses were 1
sealed, with the warning that iinine
I diate prosecutir ns wotdd follow if the
| seals were broken. All the hotels,
| formerly dealing in liquors, were vis
; ited. and all intoxicants found were
locked up in storerooms and the door
sealed.
After the first day s experience in
enforcing the law Chief Dunlap said.
“Saloon men generally are taking a
j common-sense view of this campaign.
! They realize that the government
I means business.” Following thci>•
| survey of dow ntown saloons Chicago
; revenue men visited the outlying dis
tricts and suburban towns that were
| formerly wet. Agents were also sen:
! to Aurora, Waukegan, Ottawa, Kan
I kakee. Peoria, Jolief and Spring
! Valley.
j Commenting on the enforcement
j situation, District Attorney Charles
I Clyne stated that all of the legal ma
chinery is working smoothly in the
I thirty counties of the Northern I Hi—
! nois District. “The saloonkeepers
’ seem to know what they are up
: against,” he said, “so I do not look
j for many prosecutions. There is lit
j tie chance now' of evading the law.”
Is the War Ended?
Yes and No—Wilson
I * ~ ! '
On October 25 in his statement
| calling on the coal miners not to
’ strike, President WiSson said:
i
! ‘‘The country is confronted with
| this prospect at a time when the war
! itself is still a fart, when the world
is still in suspense as to negotiations
j for peace, when our troops are still
i being transported and when their
i means of transport is in urgent need
j of fuel.”
Two days later in his Prohibition
enforcement veto message the Presi
dent said:
“I object to and cannot approve
that part of this legislation with ref
erence to war-time Prohibition. It
! has to do with the enforcement of an
act which was passed by reason of
the emergency of the war and whose
objects have been satisfied in the de
mobilization of the army and navy
and whose repeal I have already,
| sought at the hands of Congress.” i
Liquor Interests
Seek Injunction
Against War Law
Suits are Filed to Stop Action Under
Enforcement Measure
A petition has been filed by Levy
Mayer, attorney for the liquor inter
v-ts, asking a restraining order to
prevent federal agents from acting
under the new Prohibition enforce
ment law. Arguments on this peti
tion will be niadi before Federal
Judge Carpenter on November the
10th. A similar petition was filed in
tlie Federal Court at Peoria at about
the same time. In tlie Chicago Dis
trict. Attorney Charles l7. Clync and
Kevcnue Collector Julius Smictanka
arc made defendants. The petition
for injunctions recites:
"That this is a suit of a civil nature,
in equity, and arises under the Con
stitution and laws of the United
States, and particularly under the
fifth and tenth amendments to the
Constitution of the United States, and
the Act of Congress approved No
vember 21, l')18.
"The purpose of the act was to fur
ther provide for the national security
and defense by stimulating agricul
ture and facilitating the distribution
of agricultural products and for other
purposes.”
It then describes the vetoing of the
Prohibition Enforcement Act by
President Wilson and the .subsequent
passage of the act over his veto.
"The aforesaid art,” further states
Mayer’s petition, “is illegal, void, and
unconstitutional in that it operates to
deprive the plaintiff and takes its
private property without due process
of law anil for public use without jti^t
compensation.”
This contention is hacked up by
quotations from tlie fifth amendment
to the Constitution of the United
States.
On October 28th Judge Walter
Evans in the Federal Court at Louis
ville, Kentucky, in a case similar to
'■f.t otie filed i.i Sitfciigtv»eiu the war
Prohibition law unconstitutional. In
New York. Jacob Kuppert. a leading
brewer, through Eilihti Knot brought
suit against the local district attorney
and the local deputy rolleetor of in
ternal revenue to restrain them from
inforcing the war-time Prohibition
law. Injunction proceedings were
also filed in Boston and in several
other large cities asking that the Fed
eral government he restrained from
interfering with the sale of liquor un
der the war Prohibition law.
The first suit on which the wets
base their hopes is due to come be
fore the Supreme Court of the United
State> on November the 10th when
tlie ruling by Judge Evans in the
Louisville case will he considered.
DRY CANDIDATES WIN IN
CONVENTION ELECTION
Hcarst I. and R. Candidates De
feated; I. and R. Gets
Small Vote
Incomplete returns indicate a
sweeping victory in the election of
candidates for the Illinois constitu
tional convention favorable to the
dry cause. Most of the candidates
who signed the Hearst 1. and K.
pledge were defeated. The returns
indicate that the initiative and refer
endum in the radical form proposed
received a majority of the very light
vote cast. Only about one-fourth of
the vote was out. Accordingly, even
if final returns show a majority for
the initiative and referendum, it will
mean that only one-sixth of the
voters have expressed themselves in
favor of this proposal.
■ -- ,-s

xml | txt