Eastern Utah advocate. [volume] (Price, Utah) 1895-1915, 1913-07-31

what Americans drink, az fol-
lows, IA interesting both from the
"drys" and "wets" standpoints-of
interest to the "drys" because dur
ing the past few years a remarkable
portion OF the United States has
gone into the dry" column; inter
estlng to the VETS" because John
Barleycorn's campaign Is holding It's
own.
The people OF the United States
consumed during the fiscal year,
which ended June Both last. 1922
100000 gallons OF beer, also 49,
100000 gallons Of spirits. Estlma-
ting the Inhabitants OF this country
at 97,02s.497, there was in all n
per capita consumption OF 22.0S gal
Ions, which u n decrease OF II OF a
gallon per capita from 1907, which
was the high water mark for the
amount OF liquor drunk by each in
dividuai In this country. That ear
OF 1907 was also distinguished for
having tho Roosevelt panic, and that
panic appears to have driven the
people 70. an uncommon degree TO
hard drink.
Superintendent H. l.. sheldon, OF
the Antl-saloon League, finds en-
oouragmcont in the figures M given,
showing that on tho whole. M no
claims. ahoro has been a por capita
decrease In tho consumption OF H.
Quors. iIo attributes the aggregate
gain IN liquor consumption 90 the
increase In population. rather than
60 any Increase per capita IN the
drinking habits OF the people. lie
also claims that what no calls the
liquor states" a. Now York with
a per capita consumption OF asa
gallons. Pennsylvania 30 gallons.
Wisconsin 60 gallons. and other
states that show consumption large
~ above the average. arc charge
able with the oxccaa OF liquor con-
sumption. which oyercomea the gain
OF prohibition IN the dry" natca.
Io shows that In 1898 about 2b
per cent OF the people lived IN UNI
licensed territory. This unllcenaed
territory i now Increased Co so per
cent OF tho whole population. IIe
asks therefore. Has this lncreaacd
dry territory affected the eonsump- |
tion OF llquor?" As a matter of
TACT d appears from the commits
uioners reports year by year. that
there In strictly no dry" territory
IN the United States. oven though n
nay be nominally "dry," according
o the statutes OF the states. Thus
daine for many years has been
a dry" state. and yet
no number OF special tax receipts
sued per capita In Maine for the
ale OF liquor has boon fully up TO
he average OF the like receipts Ia I
ied per capita In the wet" states. q
that In the strict sense, thoro n .
o such thing as dry" territory IN {
10 United States.
Mr.. Sheldon In explaining the fig /.
res gets on better ground when he
'fera 70 che Increasing population =
{ the cities aad the Increase in IL !
nor sales corresponding 10 that In Z
reAs@. He estimates thar IA hot {
leather Chicago eonsamAe a mill
On EAlions Of beer a day, and that a
HAaAiy a million foreigners, ae- s
lsiosned 70 drinking in the old y
c-nry. are added 10 the drlnk-
% population Of our cities" y
hs concludes. therefore, that the q
,efease Of liquor consumption I'm I,
Pc eNies offsets the increase IN the
an territory. and that this n tho le
.A.en Why there Is not the decrease CT
me consumption OF liquor tba, b
-s Increase In the dry terrItorv II
oela naturally lead one 10 expee, as
mere Is good deal In what Mr. -
heidon says. but the grim fact re- =
ans that the Increase IA drinking
eeps full pace with the inerease Az an
equation. despite the galns IN drv
'frl'ory' which. as Mr.. Sheldon e
lows now includes half OF The me
OF the United state
Is a clear case. therefore. that FOR
lyone thus TO speak OF dry" ter eal
tory. In the sense IN which ma ~
'eS the term. Is misleading. That we
ere Is large consumption OF liquor an,
ary territory, In spite OF the Il
'minh "dryneas." Is certain. SIN the
mas been shrewdly observed. a we
worth while 20 have statistics Tn
80 these that please both the n see
'oF sellers and the Antl-saloon = !. =
'ague. INT
the
OLD pApFQa NON 80 the