New-York tribune., 1919-10-29

large restaurants. SuCn as Cnurcnlll'S, 8,
Cafe de Paris and Shanley's, said they
had been concentrating since July l on
endeavors to make their establish
drinking places, and believed they had
succeeded to an extent to justify them
remaining in business.
The duty of enforcing the wartime
bone dry law in the metropolitan dis
tricts falls on the shoulders of Colonel
ID. L. Porter, supervising agent of the
United States Internal Revenue Ser
vice, whose Office is in the Customs
House
Colonel Porter was i'll at his home
yesterday. One of his deputies said
that they were momentarily expecting
telegraphic instructions from Com
missioner Roper. of the Internal Rev
enue Department, to proceed with en-
forcement measures previously deter
mined upon.
Most of the saloon keepers in New
York firmly believe that Colonel Por-
ter has staff Of 800 men ready to
pounce on any OF their number who
are. the United States District Attor-
ney's office here is prepared to prose
cute speedily all persons arrested for
violation of the new enforcement law.
McCaffey Issues Statement
The following statement was issued
yesterday by United States Attorney
McCaffey:
THE so-called prohibition enforce
ment law contains three substantive
provisions to which attention is
called:
81. The new law makes it clear
that the beverages to which the war
prohibition act Of November 21, 1918,
applies include all beer wine or
other malt or vinous liquors which
contain one-half of l per cent or
more of alcohol by volume.
"2. 1t declares to be a public and
common nuisance any kind of place
where such liquor is sold manu-
factured, kept for sale or bartered
in violation of the war prohibition
act, and prescribes as punishment
q fine of not less than $l00 nor more
than $1,000 or imprisonment of not
less than thirty days or more than
one year or both.
"3. 1t authorizes the United States
District Court in suits brought by
the government to abate such nuis-
ances and enjoin their further main
tenance, and empowers the court to
punish for contempt those who vio-
late injunctions by fine of not less
than $500 nor more than 81 1000 or by
Imprisonment of not less than thirty
days nor more than twelve months,
or by both such fine and imprison-
ment."
Brewers Going Into Court
Secretary Fox of the Brewers Asso-
citation issued this statement when he
learned of the Senate's action:
"The members of the United States
Brewers Association have been ad-
vised by counsel that the Volstead
prohibition enforcement bill, known
as the national prohibition act, is un-
constitutional in 50 far as it provides
for the continuance of war prohibi-
tion. They know, as most American
citizens know, that it is discriminatory
end unjust. Nevertheless, the brewers
will observe it's terms until the courts
shall act upon it. A suit will be
brought to test the constitutionality
of these provisions, and every effort
will be made to have q prompt hear
ing.
After War Was Over
THE original war prohibition meas
ure was enacted ten days after the
war had ended, as declared by the
President himself. The present act
imposes its uneXampled and oppressive
provisions upon the American people
almost a full year after the last shot
was fired in the great conflict and
when the millions of men who were
summoned to sustain our cause upon
the high seas and upon the battlefield
nave returned to the pursuits of peace.
Yet in its immediate effect and appli-
cation it is founded upon d pretense
of actual and existing war necessity.
The annals of Legislation disclose few
instances of more shameful abuse of
legislative power
"To describe how frequently and how
fragrant y this measure violates long
established American principle and
long cherished American tradition
would require much space 1t is per
haps sufficient to indicate the ease with
which trial by jury of persons &C
cused under its provisions can be
fore and punishment by judges can bs
substituted for the customary processes
of law; how indirect or passive in
fringements of the statute can be penal
lzed; how the property of one who i:
unable to prove his ignorance of tht
illegal use of his holdings by another
can be taken away and sold; how tn,
guilt of person having possession o
liquor of any kind is presumed, in
stead of his innocence, and how the
burden of proof is upon him rathe'
than upon his accuscr; how the perso,
living in one sort of an estab ishmen
can escape search and seizure Will,
his ncighbor, living in another sort o
dwelling, is subject to invasion; how
an army Of Federal agents, at a cost o.
millions of dollars, is created for en-
forcement purposes; how onerous regu
lations govern the prescribing of liquo,
by physicians, and how the quuntitie.
that may be prescribed are arhitraril.
limited
"The law describes as intoxicatin,
liquor any beverage containing as much
as onehalf of l per cent Of alcohol b,
volume. This is contrary to the fact
for drinks containing seven times tina
aroNnt of alcohol are known to be non
II ", eating. Recent analyses by dis
tingujshed experts show that a yer,
large number of root beers, frui
syrups, proprietary beverages ane
others, all in the category of and uni
versall. recognized as soft drinks
contain more than one-half of / De
cent of alcohol. 1t is we'll known tha
liquids made of fruits or containin.