The Detroit times., 1917-05-19
The Interest of the Booze
Crowd in Our COuntry's
Babies-And a New Book

That is the cry that is being raised>by
the booze interests, TO save the makers
of beer-and the makers of whisky.
II Is a cunningly conceived cry, in
tended to give the impression of a deeply
seated interest in the people of the
nation.
This Is their argument:
National prohibition Of the manufac-
ture of intoxicating liquors would leave
large quantities of whisky, already man
ufactured in the warehouses, but would
mean the immediate elimination of beer,
which, because of its small percentage
of alcohol, will not keep for any length
of time.
ut would mean that there would be
nothing for the people to drink but
whisky"
Suddenly the booze interests are
found to be the great defenders of the
American child, with the claim that if
it were not for brewers grains, milk
could not be sent to our big towns.
But there has come to the United
States, at quite the psychological time
to meet this silly claim, book published
by the Strength of Britain Movement,
London, and called Defeat or Victory"
The book leaps almost Immediately,
and with the foreclosures of tiger, at
this pretense of the booze interests that
they are lying awake nights worrying
about the children of the men who spend
their earnings in the saloons.
Under the subtitle, "The Destruction
of Food" the publication that has been
reprinted in this country to help dry it
up, that it may fight sober, says, answer
ing the brewers sobs:
The amazing statement has been made by Mr..
r. K. Prothero, Of the board OF agriculture, that
but for brewers grains could not send milk
to our big towns as we do. II is obvious and
utter rubbish; with the profound respect due
TO our board OF agriculture. II Is hard 10 write
without contempt Of ignorance Ike this We
may despair of our business government, indeed
n we are 10 listen TO much OF this treason OF
knowledge. II is as II should take the food
from table and claim the gratitude OF the
hungry children for leaving them the svill-tuo
The drink trade does not make cattle food; IL
destroys cattle food The trade does not make
milk; II destroys II. The brewer takes good
AZ,
worst for cattle and pigs. He takes 100 pounds
of barley and leaves 80 pounds Of cattle food.
chiefly husk and woody fiber; the rest goes
into drink. and what has happened Is not that
we have gained 80 pounds OF poor cattle food.
but that have lost 10 pounds of good cattle
food and spoiled 80 pounds more. Out OF 100
pounds OF good food We have 80 pounds OF bad.
There are figures in this book to amaze
figures that do not lie and figures that
should have the effect of getting hurried
action from our government.
No better answer could be made to
the booze interests that have appointed
themselves the guardian of American
children, than the figures given in let
ter to the London Times and reproduced
In Victory or Defeat"
They show that in year in Great Britain. the
drink trade destroyed $4,000 900 bushels of grain.
or this amount, 24,700.000 bushels were
changed into alcohol carbon-dioxide poisonous
drug and poisonous gas). yeast and sediment.
There were washed away. turned into gas or
svaporated as water, 100000 bushels;
Barley husks and malt culms accounted for
$4,000 900 bushels-deteriorated residues useful
as cattle food, but for that purpose inferior TO
equal measures OF barley;
There remained in intoxicating liquor In a
decomposed and putrefying condition, 1l,os0,OOO
bushels
Do those figures show that the liquor
traders have made any cattle food, or
do they show that they took 65,000,000
bushels Of cattle food and reduced it to
19,550,000 bushels in addition to impair
ing the quality as feeding article?
Where they have not impaired they
have destroyed.
If the United States has pledged itself
10 a service to Great Britain by entering
the war as an ally, this book offers a
service in return that would help to
make our countrys' part a great deal
easier and surer were it disposed to
profit by Great Britain's experience with
booze in the war.
Defeat or Victory" was written for
England as part of the "Win-the-war"
campaign for prohibition.
1t speaks regretfully Of what prohibi-
tion of the drink trade would have meant
during the war.
Il would have saved. in drink expenditure and
It's result. So 900 900 900.
II would have added a hundred days 70 the
war work .,,.-..-.-~--
II would have saved over 200 900 cubic
feet OF shipping.