The Wheeling intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1903-1961, 1919-05-24

NEU YORK. May 3.-Cniuterrupted
nrodnc.ion Of war beer" until the
courts have passed upon the claim OF
the United States Brewers association
that the beverage containing ~ per
cent alcohol is Notwithstanding was as
sured today when Federal Judge Mayer
granted an injunction restraining XIV
ernment interference with lis manutac-
ture.
The court declared that his decision
had been influenced by President VIZ
son's message to congress rccotnHieno
ing repeal Of the war time prohioit'et,
act in so far as it relates to peer any
wine, and by Federal Judge An. Ha1!u
ruling last week that the law placed
ban on the manufacture OF liquors 'neA'
were. in fact. Intoxicating.
Although United States District At
torney Cafrey. representing the govern
rnent. opposed granting an injunction.
Judge Mayer said he believed such ac-
ton would contribute to fair settle
mcnt OF the questions raised pY the
brewers under the emergency prohiol-
ton act. The injunction. temporary
one. would be effective. the court salo'
pending review of his decision by the
circuit court OF appeals or. II the gov
ernment should decide to let 1t stand.
until the brewers suit permanently to
enjoin prosecutions for manufacture OF
the ~ per cent brew could be tried in
the district court
Judge Mayer announced that he
would sign the temporary injunction
next Monday. and suggested that the
federal attorney and Elihu Root and
William D. Guthrie. counsel for the
brewers. confer with the senior judge
OF the court Of appeals to arrange an
carly review Of the order. District At
torney CatTcy pointed out that IL pos
siblc decision on appeal should be OBJ
tanned before July. l. when prohibition
OF the sale Of intoNicants becomes ef-
fective. unless congress In the meantime
follows the suggestion OF the president
for repeal or amendment Of the law.
The injunction granted was in the
suit Of the Jacob Rupert Brewing COM
pany against District Attorney Carey
and Acting Collector Of Internal Reve-
nue. McElliSott. This is one OF q series
Of cases raising identical questions and
intended to test the emergency prohibi-
ton act in the New York district. thus
setting precedent for brewery opera
tion throughout the country.
Attorneys for tho brewers declared
they sought the temporary rest raining
order to prevent suspension ana the con-
SeQuent ruin Of their clients brssineSs
while proof was being taken pnzstheir
contcntion that war beer wax not in
toxicating The federal attorney urged
that there was no ground for eujoininG
the administration Of justice on mere
allegations CT threats TO enforce the
Law.
Mr. Mayer declared hr wished 10 RI
move the case from the technique Of
law" believing that the interests OF the
United States as we'll as tho rast prop
crtv interests involved would be best
served by thorough consideration of the
case in a single trial. He did not think
anything would be- gained by prosecu-
tions here and there. terming possible
proceedings along that line "a legal
fiction" HI ruled that an injunction
could properly be issued on the implied
threat of the government prosecuting
authorities TO enforce the law.
The court asserted that he must &C
ecpt as the law in tn" case Judge Hands
decision that the wartime prohibition
both as 10 manufacture after May and
Sale after July l. applied only to beer.
vino and kindred products that were In
toxicatipg. He added. that when the
president. having restricted production
OF beverages during the war crisis; an
nounc ID publicly that the national in
ter~st no longer Required a ban on
beer and wine. "a court OF equity mt1Ft
necessarily accept the pronouncement as
coming from a wetl-informsd source.