The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1916-1920, 1919-07-16
BEER TEST CASES
DECISIONS CONFLICT
Boston Judge Upholds Liquor
Demurrers Pittsburg Court
Refuses to Sustain.
SITUATION Is UNCHANGED
Dealers in Pennsylvania Are
Held in Bail for NOvem-
Der Court Term.

Varying decisions by two Federal
Judges in Boston and Pittsburg yester-
day. in test cases brought by the Gov
eminent against brewers and liquor sell
ers, left the prohibition situation. so far
as the sale and brewing Of beer are
concerned, practically unchanged.
|. In Pittsburg the Government won its
case. when Judge w. II. s. Thomson of
the United States District Court over
ruled demurrers Of the officials and d.
rectors OF the Pittsburg and Indepen-
dent Brewing companies to charges of
violation of the war time prohibition law.
But in Boston demurrers fled on behalf
of Leopold II. Vogel of the firm Of Petts
& vogel, liquor sellers charged with the
same offence, were sustained by Judge
George W. Anderson of the United States
District Court there.
Judge Thomson's decision followed
arguments by counsel representing the
PittsbuIg brewing officials and by r. j..
Crawford, United States District Attor-
ney. The court also stated that the
decision applied to demurrers fled yes
terday morning by eight directors oil
the Independent Brewing Company TO
| similar suit started last Saturday.
Counsel for the brewers had asked
that the suits be dismissed because. IT
was alleged. the Government suits were
based upon insufficient law. as nowhere
in the charges was 1t said that the beer
| alleged to have been brewed and sold
was Intoxicating. Attorneys for the
Government maintained. however. that
the sale of beer containing more than
| one-half OF / per cent. alcohol consti-
| tuted a violation of the war time pro-
| hibition law. After Judge Thomson had
handed down his decision each of the
| defendants was held in $1,000 bail for
trial in the November term of court.
| in arguing for the brewers before
| Judge Anderson in Boston Attorney Rob-
ert G. Dodge commended that the word
| beer" in the statute passed by Congress
| on November 81, 1918, did not refer to
| Notwithstanding beer, while Assistant
United States District Attorney Goldberg
commended that beer" was beer
| THE clause does not prohibit other
notwithstanding malt liquors. such as
Notwithstanding ale. stout and porter,
| said Mr.. Dodge, but only beer In the
| statute dealing with the importation OF
liquors beer is not mentioned. and 1t Is
irconeelvable that Congress w'ouldplace
| a ban on the manufacture of beer and
allow It's free import"
| In handing down his decision Judge
Anderson said that II was not the bust
| ness OF the courts to make legislation
| ridiculous.
You ask me-" he said. ito rule that
the sale of a liquor commonly called
beer is unlawful. I think this might
apply equally to ginger ale, which is
sometimes called ginger beer. To mis-
apply the serious purpose of Congress
In trying to conserve food and down
rum would be ridiculous. l have not
the slightest doubt that Congress in
tended to prohibit the sale Of intoxl-
| eating liquors. and not prohibit the sale
| Of non-intox.catinG liquors.
III the Government had not admitted
that the word Intoxicating had been
left out of this complaint / should have
overruled the demurrer but this admis-
| sion of the Government eliminates that
| question. There is nothing before me
! regarding Intoxicating liquors. The ques-
tion has nothing to do with temperance.
| I sustain the demurrer"