Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1920-01-05
united STATES SUPREME
court GIVES 2,75PER CENT
BREW A KNOCKOUT PUNCH.
Bench Divides, However, Standing to 4, and Nc.
Reynolds Dissents, Holding Lawmaking Power
of Congress Exceed ed in Volstead Act.

Washington, Jan. 5.-The pro-
hibition enforcement act, defining
as intoxicating any beverage con-
tanning one-half of one per cent or
more of alcohol, was declared COLI
sti.utional today by the supreme
court in an opinion on which the
court divided, to 4.
Proceedings brought by Jacob
Ripper of New. York to eu-
joi-t the government from prohibit
ing the sale of 2.75 per cent beer
were ordered dismissed.
Under War Act.
Ruppert's case was brought under
the wartime act. He alleged that
2.75 per cent beer was non-intoxi-
eating, but' that the Volstead act,
by limiting the alcoholic content,
prohibited the sale of beer manu-
fac.ured under regulations pre-
scribed under the Lever food con-
troll act by President Wilson.
Associate Justice Brandeis. who
rendered the opinion of the court,
said the right Of congress to sup
press the liquor traffic was not an
implied power, but a power ex-
pressedly granted.
Associate Justices Day, Vandc-
vanter, McReynolds and Clarke dis
sented.
McReynolds Denies Power.
Justice McReynolds in a dissent
ink opinion said that the 18th
amendment had not yet come into
effect and that the federal govern
ment had no general power to pro-
hibit the manufacture and sale of
| liquor.
He took the position that the
war emergency under which ma
tional prohibition was made effec-
tive had passed.
Drop Indictments.
Indictments brought against the
Standard Brewery at Baltimore,
and the American Brewing COM
pany at New Orleans for manufac-
turing 2.75 per cent beer, before
TIL, wartime prohibition enforce
ment act became effective, were
ordered dismissed.
Part of War Powers.
IF the war power of congress To
effectively prohibit the manufac-
ture and sole of intoxicating liquors
in order to promote the nations ef-
7 ficicncy in men, munitions, and
supplies is as full and complete as
the police power Of the states to
effectively enforce such prohibi-
ton in order to promote the health,
efficiency and morals of the COM
munity," the majority opinion said,
sit is clear, then this provision of
the Volstead act is valid and has
reno cred immaterial the question
whether plaintiffs beer is intoxica,-
ing. For the legislation and deci-
sions of the highest courts of nearly
all of the states established that Il
is deemed impossible to effectively
enforce either prohibitory laws or
other laws merely regulating the
manufacture and sale of intoxicat-
ing liquors, if liability or inclusion
within the law is made to dependd
upon the issuable fact whether Or
not particular liquor made or
sold as beverage is intoxicating.
Needed Exact Definition.
"That the federal government
would. in attempting to enforce a
prohibitory law. be confronted with
difficulties similar to those encoun-
tered by the states is obvious; and
both this experience of the states
and the need of the federal govern
ment of legislation defining intoXi.
eating liquors as was done in the
V1istead act was clearly set forsI
IN the reports Of the house judic-
iary committee. Furthermore, tn.
attorney general, calling attention
specifically TO the claim made il
respect to the 2.75 per cent beer
had pointed out to congress thai
definition Of intoxicating liquor b,
fixed standards was essential to ef'
fective enforcement of the prohibi
ton law. 1t is, therefore, clea,
both that congress might reason
ably have considered some legisla
tive definition of intoxicating liquor
to be essential to effective enforce
ment of prohibition and also tha
| III definition provided by the Vol
stead act was not an arbitrary ono
| State Power Merely Negative.
| "The police power Of state ovel
the liquor traffic is /;
single broad power to make sucf
laws, by way of prohibition. as ma!
be. required to effectively suppress
tbs traffic In intoxicating liquors
Likewise the implied war powel
over intoxicating liquors extends Il
the enactment OF laws which will
not merely prohibit the sale Of in
toxicating liquors. but will effec.
ually prevent their sale. Hardship
| resulting from making an act TAX
leffect upon its passage 10 . freQuen
incident of permissible legislation
Here the loss resulting Z
tho plaintiff from inability to U.S.
1.-The property for brewery purposel
LA an Incident f,f. the ueculiar ua