[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-322654-105":59,"doc-detail-322654-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":124,"head_meta":126,"extra_data":128,"updated_unix":130},105,"en","an-open-joint-letter-the-prohibition-amendment-an-open-joint-letter-arguing-the-amendment-is-not-part-of-the-federal-constitution","AN OPEN JOINT LETTER - THE PROHIBITION AMENDMENT - An open joint letter arguing the amendment is not part of the Federal Constitution","","An open joint letter addressed to Hon. George W. Wickersham, Chairman of the Committee on Law Enforcement, dated October 21st, 1929. The writers argue that the Prohibition Amendment is not part of the Federal Constitution and that the American people owe it no obedience. The letter cites alleged unconstitutional methods in the proposal and ratification of the Eighteenth Amendment, discusses Supreme Court decisions in the National Prohibition Cases, and frames the issue as a threat to liberties, democratic principles, and the rule of law.",{"@graph":69,"@context":123},[70,84,106],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/an-open-joint-letter-the-prohibition-amendment-an-open-joint-letter-arguing-the-amendment-is-not-part-of-the-federal-constitution/322654/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/an-open-joint-letter-the-prohibition-amendment-an-open-joint-letter-arguing-the-amendment-is-not-part-of-the-federal-constitution/322654.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Oliver","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-09-21",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":105},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",11,{"@type":107,"mainEntity":108},"FAQPage",[109,115,119],{"name":110,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":112},"Who is the open joint letter addressed to?","Question",{"text":113,"@type":114},"It is addressed to Hon. George W. Wickersham, Chairman of the Committee on Law Enforcement in Washington, D.C.","Answer",{"name":116,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":117},"What is the main contention of the letter?",{"text":118,"@type":114},"The letter contends that the Prohibition Amendment is not part of the Federal Constitution and should not be treated as binding on the American people.",{"name":120,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":121},"What evidence or rationale do the writers cite for their argument?",{"text":122,"@type":114},"The letter focuses on alleged unconstitutional methods used in proposing and ratifying the Eighteenth Amendment, and it also references Supreme Court decisions while criticizing them.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":125,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":127,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":129,"site_id":62},322654,1790159038,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":132},{"doc_id":129,"user_id":133,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":105,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":46,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":31,"preview_page_count":4},8796095461610,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","97-84073-25Davis,Charles Hall  \nAn open joint letter to  \nHon.George Wickersham[New York]  \n1929  \n# COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIESPRESERVATION DIVISIONBIBLIOGRAPHIC MICROFORM TARGET\n\nORIGINAL MATERIAL AS FILMED·EXISTING BIBLIOGRAPHIC RECORD  \nReproductions may not be made without permisslon trom Columbia Universtty Lbraries.                   \n## RESTRICTIONS ON USE:\n\n# TECHNICAL MICROFORM DATA\n\nFILM SIZE:          35mmREDUCTION RATIO:            10:/  \nIMAGE PLACEMENT:IA  \nDATE FILMED:                    5-6-97INITIALS:          9B  \nTRACKING\\#:                                                                                                23749  \nFILMED BY PRESERVATION RESOURCES,BETHLEHEM,PA.  \n308  \n# AN OPEN JOINT LETTER\n\nZ  \nto  \nHON.GEORGE W.WICKERSHAM  \nChairman,Committee on Law Enforcement,Washington,D.C.,  \nArguing the Contention that  \n# THE PROHIBITION AMENDMENT\n\nis not a part of the Federal Constitution andthat the American People owe it no obedience.  \nFrom  \nJOHN S.WISE,JR.Republican,27 Cedar Street,New York City  \nand  \nCHARLES HALL DAVIS,Democrat,1 Centre Hill,Petersburg,Virginia  \nDated October 21st,1929  \ncx 2己己  \nee一AC 2 4(2.39  \nCHARLES HALL DAVIS  \nATTORNEY AND CoUNSELOR AT LAw  \n1 Centre HillPetersburg,Virginia  \nPhone 111  \nJOHN S.WISE,Ja.  \nATTORNEY AT LAw  \n27 Cedar Street  \nNew York City  \nOetober 21st,1929.  \nHon.GEORGE W.WICKERSHAM,Chairma,Committee on Law Enforcement,Washington,D.C.  \nDear Sir:  \nThis open letter(copies of which are being given to thepress and mailed to each member of your Committee)is sentto call your attention to the public interest in the work com-mitted to your charge,the public expectation as to the char-acter of your report,the facts as to the unconstitutionalmodes used in proposing and ratifying the Eighteenth Amend-ment,and the reasons why the writers believe that the Amend-ment was never a part of the Federal Constitution,and is notbinding on the American people,in spite of the decision ofthe Supreme Court in the National Prohibition Cases.  \nAs evideneing the non-partisan character of this communi-eation,we would say that one of its signers is a life-longDemocrat from Virginia,and the other a life-long Republieanfrom New York.Neither holds any publie office.Both havebeen practicing law for over thirty years and neither repre-sents any clientele engaged in liquor traffie.  \nThe letter is submitted with great respect for and def-erence to the Supreme Court of the United States,whose de-cisions on this question are criticized;and with a belief in theability,patriotism,and sense of high responsibility charac-terizing your Committee.We believe the facts and argumentshere brought out should be called to your attention and to theattention of the American people.Their liberties,their polit-ieal principles,and their form of Democratie-RepublicanGovernment are at stakeIn our deliberate judgment the  \n2  \nvery existence of the American Republic and of our free insti-tntions is involved.In such a ease,frank statement and freecriticism,without fear or favor,is not only the right,but theduty,of every patriotic citizen.  \nThe essence of our Government is that it exists for thebenefit of the governed,and magistrates are the servants ofthe people.Both Government and magistrates are subject topublic discussion and to frank eriticism when the fundamentalrights of the people are affected by their actions and decisions.  \nThe people of the United States are entitled to full in-formation regarding any unconstitutional methods used in anattempt to amend the basic instrument that was adopted forthe protection of their libertiesWe believe that such uneon-stitutional methods were used in the alleged proposal and rati-fication of the Prohibition Amendment;with the result thatthat so-called Amendment is not today a part of the Consti-tution of the United States,but is being enforced on thepeople by despotism.  \nTo thoughtful and patriotic citizens,it is evident that thecontinuance of the United State","cbCaidQ1jo8L9nV4","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaidQ1jo8L9nV4","pdf",1302776,"English","# RESTRICTIONS ON USE:\n# TECHNICAL MICROFORM DATA\n# AN OPEN JOINT LETTER","[{\"question\":\"Who is the open joint letter addressed to?\",\"answer\":\"It is addressed to Hon. George W. Wickersham, Chairman of the Committee on Law Enforcement in Washington, D.C.\"},{\"question\":\"What is the main contention of the letter?\",\"answer\":\"The letter contends that the Prohibition Amendment is not part of the Federal Constitution and should not be treated as binding on the American people.\"},{\"question\":\"What evidence or rationale do the writers cite for their argument?\",\"answer\":\"The letter focuses on alleged unconstitutional methods used in proposing and ratifying the Eighteenth Amendment, and it also references Supreme Court decisions while criticizing them.\"}]","AN OPEN JOINT LETTER - THE PROHIBITION AMENDMENT - An open joint letter arguing the amendment is not part of the Federal Constitution | PDF",1789963233]