Evening star., 1915-11-09
Liquor Dealers Point Out Evils
Which Would Possibly Follow
District Prohibition.
FEAR A HEAVY LOSS OF
REVENUE is INEVITABLE
Sending Out Letters to Citizens As
sociations Urging Defeat of the
Sheppard Amendment.

The Washington Mercantile Associa-
tion. !. composed of licensed liquor
dealers. is sending out letters to citi-
zens' associations, pointing out that
prohibition would open the way to
large Illicit traffic in liquors in the
District under the proposed prohibi-
tion law, which prohibits sale, but not
possession and use.
The letter cites the reduction in the
revenues of the District after a years
operation of the new excise law, and
says that prohibition of the character
proposed in the Sheppard amendment
results only in forbidding the busi-
ness of selling liquors as a CONNER
cial pursuit in the District of Column
hia without attempting restriction of
the. actual possession and use of liquor.
on the contrary, possession and use
are expressly safeguarded.'
The licensed dealers of the city,
whose business would be destroyed.
according to the letter, feel that such
prohibition only transfers their busi
ness elsewhere. destroys their invest
Inent, use of real estate, employment
of local citizens and deprives the Dis
trict revenues of nearly half a million
dollars annually
Danger of Illicit Sale.
such prohibition" says the COM
munication, unless extending to the
possession and use of liquors by citi
zens for all purposes, opens the door to
illicit sale of the worst kind. If right
of possession and use is deemed essen
tial even though sale is prohibited,
any resident having a stock of liquors
in his home for personal and social use
ostensibly, may sell. and detection
nf M
possibility of suppression, and the,
sales that would inevitably occur
would be without regulation or re-
straint of any kind.
In urging careful and especially
dispassionate consideration of the sub
ject by citizens associations. the
Washington Mercantile Association
submits the following points against
prohibition for the District of Colum-
bia
J. 1t would destroy a large business
in the city, now closely regulated and
controlled. which employs much capi-
tai. real estate and labor, and pays
large revenue to the city
City Prohibition Has Failed.
- No city of the size of Washington
has approved prohibition by the vote
of its own people, and city prohibition
where attempted by state law has re-
suited in local reputation by the
people themselves.
.3 Prohibition of the kind that has
already been proposed by prohibition
lists for Washington has little connec-
tion with the actual use of liquors; on
the contrary, the unlimited possession
and use of liquors is expressly protect
ed as necessary element in the pro-
posal
- The large hotels and clubs of the
city are dependent upon their right to
sell liquor in order to maintain their
service and accommodations.
Would Drive Away Tourists.
-. Washington as a tourist resort.
as a place of temporary sojourn for
thousands of visitors each year, as
convention city, as a shopping center,
under prohibition, through the depre-
citation of hotel accommodations and
the restriction upon public entertain
ing. would cease to attract the large
classes Of visitors who in the past have
been most desired by the community at
large.
%. Washington is a cosmopolitan
city, far more so in comparison with
other cities of the country than it's
population, large as it is, would indi-
cate. and for such city prohibition is
a bad policy
a. Even the advocates of prohibit
tion concede that without large public
sentiment in favor of the policy its en-
foTcement is impossible and its results
evil There should be no adoption of
the policy for Washington unless the
population clearly indorses it,