The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1919-08-07
Peter NJ. Anderson Of Low
er House Takes His Con-
stituents Into His Conf
dence In Open Letter.
SAYS MUL BERGER BILL BAD
Assemblyman From Kenosha County
Does Not Mince Matters In Discus
sion of Bill Which Wisconsin viii
Propose AS Enforcement Measure.

IA H.
represented Kenosha county in the low
er house of the legislature, has issued
a sizzling statement in an answer to
ecritics of his vote on the Mulberger
bill. It is one Of the most enlighten-
ing statements issued in regard to this
attempt of the state to define iftoxi-
cants. AssembIyman Anderson has no
idea of being misunderstood or mis-
quoted in the matter and his signed
statement is published as follows:
70 the Citizens Of Kenosha county:
! have been criticised by certain wet
interests Of my county for my stand
on what is commonly known as the Null
berger bill, which is a purported en-
forcement measure based on the 18th
Amendment to the Federal Constitp-
ton. / do not think that anyone will
say that / voted wrong after he under
stands the full meaning of the BILL
/ voted for certain amendments to
the State Affairs Committee Bill No.
504-A'' including an amendment refer
ring to vote of people. The vets had
no enforcement measure before the
legislature at that time. The Mulber-
ger bill is substitute amendment
to bill 146-S.
"1This substitute amendment de-
clares that liquors or compounds
containing 21aae by weight (3.19o
by volume) of alcohol shall not be
intoxicating; providing as follows
But if the Congress of the United
States shall hereafter, by a valid
act which shall become the law of
the land and be paramount to any
state laws on the subject, define
the words Intoxicating liquors as
used in Article Is of the Constitu-
ton Of the United States, then such
definition, from the time such act
of Congress becomes operative,
shall be the definition thereof
under this subdivision
/ have consulted lawyers and [ am
told that under this definition the
the definition of Congress can never
become the definition in this state.
think, and / believe that you think,
that the state and federal govern
ments should have the same standard
Of enforcement.
Both ths Congress and the state leg
Eislature have power to define intoxi-
eating liquor and to enforce its own
laws to the alcoholic content or stand
lard set for itself. This contention is
made by VIM. Austin, counsel for Wis
consin Brewers Association, and ]
quote from bulletin or phamphlet
entitled, tThe Situation and written
| by Mr.. Austin Of date of May IA,
1919, in which he says:
1t is within the power of Con-
| gress or the legislature of the sew
/ eral states acting within the police
| power to pass an act defining what
! shall constitute Intoxicating liquors
within the meaning of the constitu-
| tional amendment referred to, etc.
! 1T is not conceded by either
side that Congress has the exclu-
sive authority under the concur
| rent clause in this amendment, to
legislate upon this subject
Nor do the vets concede that
/ If the state should fix thedefnition
of intoxicating beverages at two
or three per cent, that the act of
Congress providing a lower alco-
holic content would within the
boundaries of the state super
sede and annul the act of the
state legislature. y
| I submit that the contention of the
vets that the definition of Congress
will become the definition under the
provisions of this bill if enacted, is un
| tenable, and has every indication OF
intention of being made in bad faith
and purposely intended to deceive; they
are condemned by their own statements
This Mulberger bill repealed all OF
| Chapter Sc, Statutes of Wisconsin 81
1917 regulating the traffic in intoxi
eating liquors. Such repeal would per
nit. the sale of 211a per cent alcohol,
liquors to minors-boys and girls OF
tender years from infancy up,-woule
permit the location Of beer saloons in
At or near old soldiers homes. sshaols