Evening Republican, Volume 22, Number 163, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 12 July 1919 — HOUSE DEBATES BOOZE QUESTION FOR FIVE HOURS. [ARTICLE]

HOUSE DEBATES BOOZE QUESTION FOR FIVE HOURS.

Washington, July 11.—In the course of a five-hour debate in the house today on the prohibition bill, the (liquor traffic was likened to a l convicted criminal, appealing for a reprieve, while some of the more drastic provisions of the measure were denounced as an invasion of the liberty, hospitality and habits of the home. J Last of Oratory. It probably was the last great day of prohibition oratory in the house. Not all of the twelve hours set aside for general debate hadbeen used at the close of an alFday discussion, which ranged from a technical argument on . constitutional questions to a straight stump speech for prohibition and its enforcement. . Chairman Volstead, of the judiciary committee, in charge of the bill,’ and Representative Igoe, democrat, of Missouri, leader of the minority, were unable to allot all of the time desired by members anxious to be heard. There were more demands than there was tinfle to give, with everybody wanting a word. Time and again there was the droning call, “the gentleman asks permission to extend and revise his remarks.” The speech making will continue tomorrow, but the house woll not begin its actual work on the bill, section by section, until Monday. Oppose Provisions. ■Again today ardent prohibitionists declared they could not support the enforcement bill because of its provisions, and others contended that once congress defines intoxicating liquors as a beverage containing one-half of one per cent alcohol, the federal law for j-uch enforcement cannot become effective without concurrent action by the several states. The principal “ dry ” argument against the measures today was made by Representative Moon, democrat, of Tennessee, who declared that unless it was materially amended, he would feel in duty bound to vote against it or else express his disapproval by not voting at all. Going Beyond Power*. For twenty-two years, Mr. Moon said, he had stood upon the floor of the house and upheld the cause of prohibition, but the enforcement bill, which he characterized as “impracticable and senseless as anything ever suggested, should be opposed because it is worse in all its .features than the infamouse Force

■bill.” He asserted congress* was going beyond its constitutional powers to say a man should not have liquor in his home and in its efforts to define intoxicating liquors by limiting the alcoholic content to onehalf of one per cent. Dry* Disconcerted. It was apparent tonight that prohibition leaders were somewhat disconcerted by persistent attacks on the enforcement bill by members of the house, regarded heretofore as certain to support it. They still ■claimed, however, to have votes enough to put it through substan■tially as drafted, although they said radical changes undoubtedly would be made by the senate. The drive by the “wets” apparently had broken up all attempts threatened several, days ago to make the bill more drastic than in its present form.