Washington sentinel., 1901-02-09

lief measure. Surely, tobacco is
not opposing beer tax reduction
Take whisky. American beers
and ales contain about 3 per cent
alcohol. They pay SI.Ss tax on a
barrel OF 81 pallons-6 6 cents gal
lon-or at the rate oi cents pei
each hundredth part Of alcohol
Whisky contains about so per cent
alcohol. 1t pays SI,Io per gallon
or at the rate Of cents per each
hundredth part Of alcohol. Up to
this point things are about equal.
The wholesale price ot 81 gallons
Of beer averages IS. The whole
sale price OF the same quantity of
whisky may be placed at S67. Is
whisky burdened with an impost
beyond its ability to carry7 Now
from the standpoint Of the retailer.
A gallon OF beer will not bring the
retailer over 40 cents. A gallon
of whisky is reputed to yield the
retailer not less than IS, Upon
what grounds can whisky oppose
reduction to beer5
Why should any one object to
the reduction granted to besr5
Since the passage of the War Rev
enue Act. in June. 1898, brewers
have paid nearly SIoo, 900. 900 in
extra taxes. One-thlrd OF the en-
tire amount collected vas paid by
them. Is the decrease recon-
mended disproportionate to their
sacri6ces5 No. Since reduction is
not to be carried beyond the sum
named-S4o.o 900, ,ooo--justice de-
mands that beer should share in
that reduction in proportion with
her contribution to the whole sum.
The Senate has viewed it in this
light and granted relief accord.
ingly Who should object1
View it from any point you will,
the weight OF argument is in favor
Of large reduction to brewers.
the sale of patent medicines has
not been perceptibly decreased by
the war tax nor their profits en-
dangered, the cent tax on bank
checks has pauperized no one that
the public has been made aware
OF, and il dealer in distilled
goods has been driven to the wall
at any time in the past three years,
the reason must be sought for in
other directions than the War Rev
enue Act, for Congress imposed
no share OF that burden upon his
shoulders.
How has it been with the brew
ers7 The story has been told so
often and so fully that it is need
less to repeat it here. Every phase
Of their claim has been gone over
until Congress should be able to
repeat them bV heart. AS sum
married. by the Board OF Trustees
OF the United States Brewers AS
sociatIon, "they are entitled to a
larger reduction, because in he
entire war revenue act of 1893
there is not single tax item, ex-
cepting our own, that is unjust or
inequitable IN itself; none, except
ing the beer tax, that has caused
or is likely to cause widespread
industrial ruin; none, again with
the same exception, that must be
borne by comparatively small
number OF citizens for the exclu-
sive benefit Of all those numerous
and immensely wealthy industries
which, while protected by wise
tariff laws, contribute not a single
dollar to the internal revenue; and,
final y, none that must ltImately
affect such large masses OF the
poorer people,"
We look for a speedy agreement
on this bill between the two
Houses OF Congress. We antici-
pate no change in the beer sched-
ule, whatever the influences
brought to bear in that direction.
and hope to be able to chronicle
the signing Of the bill by the Pres
ident in the next issue Of the SEN
TINEL.