Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1906-09-03
FALSEHOoD NAILED.
Continued from Page One)

beverage by dcnaturng. and that the
production of any Intoxicating alcoholic
| liquor at any stage in the process of man
l ufacturing any liquor is prohibited bv rho
| constitution regardless of what il NAV
be the ultimate purpose of such process
| of manufacture to produce and what il
does in fact produce.
| AS to III" first OF these propositions
| namely. that the denaturinE can only no
done after the hruor has been placed in
Il bonded warehouse this is ,ndoubtedIv
| true. not in my opinion. by virtue nv tho
| old existing law, as Mr.. Goddard de-
| clares. but by reason of the Senate
| amendment to tn" new act. as to which
| Mr.. Goddard does not seem to have been
| informed. and which inserted the clouso
| that such dcnatuiing should he done
| upon the application of any rccistcrcd
distillnr in dcnaturing. bonded warehouses
| specially designated or set aside for de-
maturing purposes only
| Mr.. Goddard'S second proposition. how
| ever rests, to my mind, upon a wholly
| unwarranted assumption; namely. that =,
| process of manufacture, which at any
stage produces Intoxicating alcoholic IL
Quor. is prohibited and illegal, where it's
| finished product. If allowed to be finish
ed. would be notwithstanding and lawful.
| In the first place it is to be noted that
| there is no such mystery or importanc.
to be attached to this matter of placing
the liquors in bond as Mr.. Goddard seems
| to have attached to it, and that it does
not necessarily Interrupt the continuous
process of manufacture.
las has been shown above under tha
| provisions of Section 3271, the distille;.
provides his own warehouse at his own
| expense, situated upon and constituting
| a part of his dstillery premises; and
! this, on approval, constitutes the govern
m"nt bonded warehouse, supervised by a
| government storekeeper. The manufac-
| turcr is not obliged to send away his
| liquors to a long distance and part with
| all possession and control of them. The
| whole thing Is done right in his own
| plant and on his own premises, and the
| liquors bonded therein are by express
| terms of the statute in the joint custody
| nf the government storekeerer and the
| manufacturer. (Sce Section 3214) Though
| the new act requires that the dcnatrring
| shall be done in the bonded warehouse
specially designated for dcnatur;ng pur-
poses only, in this State where none but
the dcnatured alsOhol could upon anv
View b" legally manufactured, every dis
tiller's warehouse could and would he des-
J iCnatcd as a warehouse for dcnat,Iring
only. and tho State statute as to common
li1uor nuisanccs would forbid the MAIN
tenance of warehouses for any other
kind of distilled spirits. In the process
of manufacture therefore. the result
would simply be that the spirits would
be distilled on one side of the premises
| in tho forenoon and carried into tie
bonded warehouse on Tire ether SIDE Of
the premises and denaturcd in the ar-
tcrnoon. The fact that they are placed
in the warehouse and come under GOV
eminent supervision in nc way prevents
or delays the continuation Of the process
Of manufacture. The denaturing is still
another essential step in that process.
The expense of the methyl Gwood alcohol
or other denaturng material required
and of the nature involved is still borne
by the manufacturer. the only difference
being that the government has a super
visory control while the process is going
on. The bonding and supervision, there
fcrc. in no way alters the essential con-
tnuity of the process. and the situation
is not different in principle from what it |
would be if no bonding or supervision
were required. The argument against the |
right to manufacture the denatured pro-
duct must rest solely upon the simple |
fact that an Intoxicating alcoholic bevcr- |
age is produced at one stage in the pro-
cess before the denaturing or final step
in the process can be taken and the Ii |
Nuor rendered notwithstanding
My contention and opinion u.s. however |
that this fact is wholly insufficient |
ground on which to base the conclusion |
that such an incidental and intermediates /
step in the process of making a finished |
product is what is meant by the word |
manufacture in the constitution. We /
must take q broader view of the matter
and start from the standpoint of the l
fundamental spirit and purpose of our
prohbitory law. The object of that law
is simply to prevent the manufacture and |
sale of Intoxicating liquors. 1t certainly |
was not designed and should never be |
strained to prevent citizens Of State
engaging in any manufacturing busiess.
the avowed object, and the ultimate pro-
duct of which is n Notwithstanding IL
duor The question Is simply, What is
the process Of manufacture In its en-
tircty? The reference made by Mr.. God
dard to the fact that when alcohol is
sold for a purpose other than that of an
Intoxicating beverage. such purpose is
held not to render the sale legal, fur
nshes no analogy upon this point The
question is not. what lis a PERSONS pur-
pose in manufacturing intoxicating IL
quor, but does he manufacture an intox-
icatirg liqnor when allowed to complete
the process of manufacture and reach his
finished product originally intended.
1t is easily conceivable that there arc
manufactured in this State today legiti-
mate liquor products in the manufacture
of which at one stage alcoholic liquor
available as a beverage hay have been
generated. But the state has no right
to split this act of manufacture in two
place its finger upon a point where such
alcohol has been generated. say this bus
iress is illegal and crime. before the