The Bridgeport times and evening farmer., 1919-07-24
Sale Of Weak Beer IS Violation Of Dry Law
 Federal Court Holds
Continued from Page One)

but which is that sort of beer now manufactured by the brewers since he restriction upon the use of grain, and which does not contain as much as 2.75 per cent. alcohol.
 It was argued in the support of the demurrer that such beer was not in fact intoxicating for the reason that before a person could obtain suffi- cient quantity of alcohol to intoxicate one time. Whether intoxication could extent as to make him i,i, or to ex- Ceed the capacity of consumption at be produced by taking the beer in small quantities over longer period or time or whether some individual might be intoxicated by one quanti- ty while others would not be affected by the same quantity cannot be ascer- tained from the information nor from the demurrer.
 "It is apparent that there is noth- ing in this record from which the court can determine in any way what amount Of alcoholic content would make beer intoxicating and what would not.
 The demurrer has admitted the facts alleged in the information. The defendant has thereby admitted that he made a sale of beer which is q product of malt and which is com monly known as lager.
 Therefore the only point presented upon this demurrer to the information is whether il is necessary to allege in an information that the fbeer sold was intoxicating. The information does state that il contains alcohol and is a malt product and to this extent and in this way the material is excluded from the class of non alcoholic bev- eraCes such as root beer and other varieties of home made or harmless drinks which are not the product of malt.
 The statute expressly limits the effect of this portion of the law to products of malt and vinous fermenta- tior. This of itself initiates against the idea that the sole purpose of the statute was to conserve food and in dicates that a part of the purpose was 10 accomplish prohibition with the in cidcntal beneficial result upon the health of the nation and the increase in orderly behavior which the advo- cates of prohibition believe will fol- low restruction of the liquor traffic and the prohibition of alcoholic bev- era~cs.
 "It is apparent that the intent of the congress was to prohibit the sale
 
 commonly known as beer. and which were also commonly supposed to be intoxicating. which had always been classified as an intoxicating liquor and which because of their alcoholic con tent had some effect upon the pro- duction and man power of the nation while at the same time using in their manufacture some of the food pro ducts of the ation which were needed for the purposes of the war and for the purpose of restoring conditions at the termination of hostilities so far as congress had power to regulate condi- tions after the war as a. part of it's military operation and conduct.
 'Jt is evident that if congress by making a tremendous drain upon the resources of the country for immediate war purposes should thereby make it necessary to regulate the use of mater iaI immediately thereafter in order to bring matters back to a normal base the laws by which such restoration would be had can properly be made a part of the military measure which must be adopted in order to carry on the war and are therefore jusdfi ed under the power of the United States in waginG war, as had been decided in the case of the United States against Winery in that district in an opinion filed upon this day.
 Congress had 1t In mind" the op- inion asserts, ito say beer or any other product of malt of an intoxicating na- ture." The thought was that expressed in the selective service law, which says no intoxicating liquor. including beer, ale or wine But either state ment would suggest that congress classified and intended to classify