Sign the Resolution Contents | Feedback | Search DRCNet Home | Join DRCNet DRCNet Library | Schaffer Library Historical References 1926 Senate Prohibition Hearings
General Histories | Ancient History | 1800-1850 | 1860 | 1870 | 1880 | 1890 1900 | 1910 | 1920 | 1930 | 1940 | 1950 | 1960 | 1970 | 1980 | 1990

Senator WALSH. Give us your name, please.

Representative MEAD. James M. Mead. A Representative from the Forty-second District of New York. I wish to file with the committee what is tentatively known as the New York Democratic plan.

Senator WALSH. That is H. R. 11050?

Representative MEAD. Yes. Senator WALSH Very well. (H. R. 11050 is as follows:)

[H. R. 11050, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session]

A BILL To promote temperance In the United States

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, This act shall be known, cited, and referred to as the temperance act of the United States.

SEC. 2. Chapter 85 of the Public Laws of the United States, of the first session of the Sixty-sixth Congress of the United States which became law notwithstanding the veto of the President of the United States by the overriding votes of the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States, on the 28th day of October, 1919, the short title of which is the national prohibition act, and which is generally known as the Volstead law, is hereby repealed.

SEC. 3. The manufacture, sale, or transportation of distilled alcoholic liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from, the United States and all territories subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited. The violation hereof shall be a misdemeanor and be punishable by a fine of $100 or thirty days' imprisonment, or both.

Representative MEAD. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee: It is my desire to present for your consideration a bill introduced and sponsored by approximately 20 members of the Democratic congressional delegation. from New York State. This bill), H. R. 11050, is entitled "An act to promote temperance in the United States," and as that is the virtue we would have our people practice as well as being the expressed aim of the opponents and proponents of the Volstead Act, I am sure you will all agree with me when I say this bill comes to you with a good name.

Section 2 of this act repeals the Volstead law and in section 3 we have, instead of the definitions and restrictions included in that act, the following language:

The manufacture, sale, or transportation of distilled alcoholic liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from, the United States and all territories subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.

In addition to the above and in. addition also to the language now in the bill, the phraseology of the Volstead law can be added to this bill with, of course, the substitution of the definition as contained in our plan and eliminating therefrom the language defining intoxicating liquors now contained in the present law. If this so-called New York plan is to be considered it must be understood that any State in the Union is privileged to reenact a similar law or one more drastic just as they desire. This, we believe, Will win the cooperation of the several States to the enforcement of national prohibition. It is further understood that the pre-Volstead liquor laws, such as the Webb-Kenyon law as well as the tax laws, will be in full force and

266 * * * * * THE NATIONAL PROHIBITION LAW * * * * *

effect, and the States that decide to remain more dry than required by our bill will be protected from the importation of mild beers and wines that may be permitted in adjoining States. It is further believed that this act would restore the dignity of our Federal courts and lessen the number of cases on their dockets and render unnecessary the constant demand made on the Congress for additional judges.

Under the provisions of this bill you will notice that distilled alcoholic liquors, which include the so-called hard liquors, are emphatically prohibited, while the fermented liquors and fruit juices may be permitted by reason of the absence of definite language to the contrary. It is true that beer, ale, stout, and wine may be manufactured and sold without violating either the spirit or the wording of this act, and in this connection we follow very closely the spirit and language of the Constitution.

If this bill were to become a law and the people permitted the use of light wines and beer prohibition could be enforced, and we have the experience of the Canadian Provinces as well as several European countries to prove this statement. If, on the other hand, we try to enforce the present unpopular Volstead law, which in my judgment is impossible of enforcement, the suggestions made by the Federal district attorney Mr. Buckner, of New York, will have to be carried out. If, as Mr. Buckner states, it will require $75,000,000 to enforce the law in New York it will require upward of $500,000,000 to carry on the work throughout the United States, and instead of 85 additional judges, 500 would be required, with an army of 10,000 high-salaried dry agents to see to it that the provisions of the law were carried out. After reading very carefully the statement made by the Federal attorney, who certainly has given much thought and consideration to the subject, I believe my figures are conservative.

I would suggest, in view of the startling conditions as developed by the hearings before this committee by, those in a position to know, and also in view of the importance of this question, that the committee membership be increased and their powers extended to permit them to study the problem as it exists throughout the United States and also to visit the Provinces of Canada and other countries if necessary in order that a recommendation may be submitted at the next session of Congress which would be in keeping with the desires of the American people. I am of the opinion that the subject should be studied from all angles; the economic, moral, and health conditions should be ascertained, as the question is large enough and important enough to warrant such a thorough investigation.

Mr. CODMAN. I will call Sir William Stavert, who will tell you in regard to the workings in the Province of Quebec, and will state to the committee what official position in connection with that law has been.

(The witness was duly sworn by Senator Walsh.)

Mr. CODMAN. If you will proceed in your own way, Sir William.

Sir WILLIAM STAVERT. I only arrived in this country, on this continent, last Thursday afternoon, and there received the invitation at New York and did not, in consequence, have time to provide