The Washington herald., 1916-02-04

TIE alConolc content OF the nouorf
consumed per capita Boiling the water
out OF these liquors and measuring
them for their alcohol we find that the
per capita consumption was only .ss
gallon In 1897. and that IL has grown
steadily since then from year 20 year.
until in 1914 Il reached the highest
figure. l.53 gallons This increase, say
the vets" parailelins as II does the
increase in dry" territory. proves that
merely making Il hard TO get beer.
whereas whisky Is to be had every
where.
Hard Liquor or Water.
The most important fact to be con-
sidered. however. is that the moonshIne
industry, so far. has concerned itself
solely with whisky making. II the
manufacture and sale OF ali kinds of
liquor are eventually prohibIteu by
law, Will this result in the production
OF both moonshine whisky and moon
shine beer. or will the nation find IT.
self reduced to a choice between hard
liquor and water? The truth is that
1t seems a simpler matter to distfu
than to ferment. This is shown in one
way, perhaps. by the fact that brewery
employees are unionized. distillery en-
ployes are not. The government in
drawing up its latest revenue measure
refrained from placing additional
duties on distilled liquors for the res-
son. as stated. that these could be
made so easily. II seems TO be con-
Nceded that every man could make his
own spirits were II not for the reve-
nue. law restrictions and the fact that
ne can BUY more palstable. liquor than
he can make.
With this situation in mind IL is in
n 1as
that might follow various proposed pro-
hibitory laws. The Hobson amendment
Is the most prominent among these.
This amendment, IL enacted would
have destroyed the organized LIQUOR
industry. but IL would have allowed
every man to make his own liouor.
The only restriction was as TO sale.
This amendment confined itself to the
| sale, manufacture for sale importa ton
for sale. expectation for sc!e and trans
portation for sale OF all beverages and
all foods containing alcohol" There
was no prohibition on manufacture
| importation, expectation or transporta
| tion If the beverages or foods were not
for sale. Every farmer would have
been. had the amendment been adopt-
ed. at liberty to convert his fruit and
grain INTO liquors and every city man
would have been at liberty to buy
fruits and grains for the same purpose
| In considering the liquor problem the
| innocent bystander has usually forgot
ten that we have the present system OF
oistilleries and breweries purely be-
cause of the fact that government de-
rlNes revenue from liquor production
Prior to 1894 there was no tax on IN,
making of liquor and every man who
wished participated. But as soon as
an excise was placed on production the
L
basis Every time the tax was fncress-
ed the industry was concentrated in
FEWER hands In fact the dfstfllers ar.
| charged by some historians with hav-
ing, themselves, brought about the in
crease in revenue tax from so cents q
gallon In 1870 to sl.lo a gallon in 1898
AS the increased revenue did not spply
TO whisky already made the distfIlers
1t Is said. gained just so much cles :
proht through the higher market prjc.
| 10 which the increased tax forced the
| article. Be this as II may, the govern
| ment revenue machine has been a sort
or tarih wall around the men already
in the business, both distillers and
brewers. AS the consumer paid the tax
the producer made just as much proht
and he was relieved OF a world of small
competition. The revenue officers acted
as watch dogs for him.
| II revolutionary legislation forced
the government to give up revenues
from liquor. government would have
no further reason for seeking out and
destroying stills. The whole preven-
tion of manufacture would fall upon
the local authorities. The flood OF
cheap liquor that would presumab ably
follow-the best of whisky could be
made for rs cents a gallon were the
tax removed-would undoubtedly ruin
the present great distillers and brew
ers.
| Would the people, as the result Of
these various legislative enactments
| hnally settle down TO nationwide c
teetotalism, or would liquor become an
article of general household production
and use? The question OF temperament
is here to be considered. So far moon
| shine distillatiOn has been confined
largely to the Southern mountains. Are
| these mountaineers so mentally apart
| from the rest OF the population that
this Illicit activity may be expected tC
confine itself to them? There are both
wet" and dry" arguments to Dt
\ had. The dry" can say: IF we
found moonshining distributed equally
throughout the United States we might
as you suggest. fear that saloon clos
ing would lead to a large general pro-
duction of Illicit spirits. But nowhere
| except among the ilIlterate and pow
| erty- stricken mountainers, do we find
| II. The idea is alien to all our pro-
| gressive communities" The wet" on
the other hand. may reply: "Moonshin-
ing is confined to the South because Il
! is in the South that prohibition most
nearly prohibits. Prohibition was made
nearly prohibits. Prohibition was made
be enforced because the people who
control the machinery OF law want IL
enforced-against the negro and the
poor whites. These, in certain COM
munities, cannot buy liquor where the
controlling class buy il. So a moon
shine industry springs up to supply
| their demand. The same thing would
happen in any other part of the coun-
try did prohibition really prohibit
Chamberlin's Magazine.
| St Louis bank clearings in 1915 aggre-