the Soul Pxom vu Own Conetsroxreyt San Francisco, Apr. 26.
"The ravings.of fanatics and the passage of foolish laws by cowardly legislators will not deter millions' of Americans from drinking liquor. Only @ fanatic can believe that the drinking of wine and beer and spirits in moderation is a sin."
'This was a final thrust by Mr. Julien Codman, counsel for the Wets, in his argument before the' Senate Prohibition Committee, just concluded. As the Yank says, the whole country has been "het up" over the fight which has been taking place at Washington, and now that the hearing is ended both parties are claiming a victory. So far as one would judge from the evidence so far reported, however it seems to have been made clear that a far larger proportion of the American public desire modification of the Volstead Act than was sup-pored by the Drys. Certain it is the hearing has been productive of no good. The recent newspaper straw vote, which overwhelmingly showed that the people of the larger cities desired a return to light wines and beers, tended to clear the way for the' official investi tion, which also has brought out, some astoundingly strong evidence that even in circles where one would Toast expect it, the support is, virtually with the Wets.
Mr. Codman declared that people who believed that a nation can be made moral by legislative act "are wholly blind to the fact that illegal manufacture of liquor, rum-running and bootlegging exist simply because there is a demand from the people of this country for the products which are thus supplied' And he added: "Law or no law, so Jong as the demand continues way of satisfying it will be found, and that he is indisputably right in what he says is proved over and over again by the scandalous evidence collected at the hearing.
The Wets claim to have proved the following principal points:
(a) That since 1920, when the Volstead Act went into effect, drinking and drunkenness have ally, #0 far as I can see, is, that this' man is perennially and hope-Tessly up to his neck in debt. More-rer, he rarely has the acumen to insure against all these liabilities, must keep well and must keep work. ing, for unless he does and fortune should' overtake him, supposed possessions topple like a house of cards and he finds himself sailly out of Tuck, Credit everywhere is always good. It is only good however, as long itis rightly used, Abused credit always is the forerunner of disaster. And it seems to me personally, though I repeat that my know-edge is very small in such matters, that one of the worst adver-rising slogans in this country to-day "Your Credit Is Good." suppose, from the selling standpoint, the story is a different one. The merchandisers argue that there are more honest people in the world than the other kind—which, thanks be, is true. They say that by the law of average, if they can sell a hundred articles to 2 hundred customers without money who would not be customers of all if no ere-dit were given, an overwhelming percentage of the hundred buyers would Fay up in full, and the loss from these who do not is. infinitesimal compared with the increased sales which the system encourages.
Bat economically it is unsound, so far as my experience lends me to Tt is quite common to find a man who docs not really own the house he lives in, the car he drives, the bed he sleeps on, the general paraphernalia" of his home, the very clothes he and his wife and children wear—nor, indeed the food they eat, for the grocer offers the same credit sprat to catch hig mac-
But, referring to the first paragraph' of this article, itis this growing credit system, with all its ramifications, that has made the Fe-deal Reserve system necessary. in the most appalling manner.
(b) That the character " of Grinking has greatly changed for the worse alcohol in the form of split-whisky, split-gin and moonshine now "drunk place of the beer of earlier days.
That corruption exists upon scale so colossal that it makes one tremble for the security of our institutions.
That women' and children in this country: drink as never before.
(e) This is because the law has not public sanction behind it, and is constantly violated without compunction by almost every class of the community.
(f) Where sentiment of people is in favour of probibition, it will be accepted and can be enforced, but where public opinion is against it, in such communities prohibition as ex-amplified in the Volstead Act can never be enforced.
The Wets demanded the ment of the Edge Bill permit the manufacture of non-intoxicating beer, and their counsel called tention to the statement of General L. ©. Andrews, dry law enforeement chief, that the sale of beer would aid in law enforcement, remarking that. General Andrews had a more accurate knowledge of this subject than any other man in the country—"whose practical mind is not clouded with prejudices of any kind." It was claimed that even the super-efficient United States district attorneys at Chicago and Cleveland admitted on cross-examination, after all their bragging, that they neither made any attempt to prosecute the owners of small stills nor had they any knowledge of how many existed in their districts, Mr. Codman said there was searcely one of the prohibition speakers who had not fulminated against the talked "as if the people of the United States would be contented with abstinence if only the liquor interests' would let them alone," but that showed "a mental di honesty that would be amusing if it were not contemptible." He quoted, amid hilarious applause by the Wets, the words of President Coolidge "Any attempt to dragoon the body when the need is to convince the soul will end in revolt'
The Case of the Drys Summing up for the Drys after the three weeks of testimony on the two sides of the controversy, Mr. Wayne B. Wheeler (genera counsel of the Anti-Saloon League) aid the arguments presented by the various advocates of the impending Wet measures "are a conglomeration of heterogencot incoherent inconsistencies" and committee could make up @ favourable report on these Wet bills on the testimony submitted, Reviewing the various Wet proposals, Mr. Wheeler claimed that intoxicating liquors could not be legalized, and that a non-intoxicating beer would not satisfy those who demand alcoholic. stimulants.
Though he not mention General Lincoln by name, the Dry counsel took. issue with his opinion that the tale of such beet under restriefons might aid in law enforcement. Merely to legalize a non-intoxicating beer would in no way eliminate the bootlegger," he said, "while on the other hand there would be the constant incentive for the brewers Surreptitiously to manufacture and distribute high-powered beer, and this would add greatly to the Sificulties of enforcement." claimed that it woold never possible for the Wets to succeed in winning the day. Tae 18,000,000 women whose representatives appeared at the hearing, the church people represented by bishops, leading clergymen and temperance organizations representing over 20, 000,000, the ceonorsie experts showing the value of prohibition to the people generally testified to the alleged fact that the nation prefers prohibition, with its aceompaniments of lowered death tstes, decreased crime and drunkenness and widespread prosperity and happiness—the nation preferred this, said Mr. Wheeler, to the vice, crime and corruption which would mark the brewers' return to power.
He argued that because a state defaulted inthe follment of its
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.