On the subject of Prohibition political parties have been formed, economic treatises have been written, and sociologic surveys have been compiled. For more than a decade it has been the outstanding dilemma of American life. When it first became apparent that the 18th amendment was not a successful solution to the liquor problem its sponsors asked, quite reasonably, that it be given time. But the years have made clear that time alone will be unable to produce a suitable solution. Recently prohibtion has assumed the aspects of a truly dangerous problem both because of its obvious evils and because of the derision of thinking men.

There have been various attempts to arrive at some conclusion as to the relative merits of prohibition, but all for one reason or an other have failed to produce results which could be crystallized in material benefits. Mr. Woodcock, the present Prohibition Director, has recently forwarded a new plan of attack. He has asked various college professors to help him in his attempt to offer an effective answer to the question, with Professor Cabot of the Social Ethics department as Chairman of the committee. In attacking Prohibition from its sociologic aspects the committee hopes to find its effect upon the American civilization. This is a logical approach, for the amendment was passed primarily as a social benefit. From a layman's view it has not been successful as such, and it has brought in its wake a host of political and economic evils. It will lie within the province of the committee, to ascertain the real benefits and the real evils which have accrued from prohibition, and to offer if possible correctives.

How much the committee will and can accomplish is a question. Other committees have sought the true solution and have filed, but each has contributed something, if only to reaffirm the complexity of the problem as it exists today. Some results can be expected from a group of sincere and thinking men, and some relief from the present situation can be hoped for. Their success lies largely with themselves. It they approach with a thesis, but if they begin with an unbiased desire for correction, they should contribute something of value.