The Washington times., 1920-01-05
UphoIds Authority Of Congress
To Fix Alcoholic Content
In Beverages. a
BRARDEIs READS DECISION
Billion Dollars Worth 81 Sas
Goods Total Loss a. Rt..
suit of Decision.

Upholding the constitutionaiity Of
the most vital section Of the Vcl.
stead enforcement law, the Supreme
Court today declared that 275 and
other near beers cannot be sold uns
der wartime prohibition
The importont feature Of The de-
cision is that the court upheld tbs
action Of Congress in declaring il
toxicating and preventing the sale {
all beverages containing " Of
per cent or more of alcohol by yos
ume, with the exception Of honcs
made cider and wine.
Rests With Congress. 3
The action Of the Government III
prohibktiag the sale of 2.75 beer bet
before and after the yolstead law W.
passed on October IS, 1919. rras uYs
held.
The decision of the court was six e
three, Justices Day. Vandevanter sae
McReynoids dissenting.
The decree of the court may D.
taken as q definition OF intoxicatin
liquor that will stand under constitv.4
tional prohibition also. because Of th
definite statement that Congress, )
providing for the enforcement OF pros
hibition, can prescribe just what
makes a beverage Intoxicating
The case decided today rR2 en- at4
peal from the New YEr'k I'd ~
courts, brought by Jacob 3 lapgrA. q
brewery corporation.
Justice Brandeis read IN Gplrsp6
of the court, as he did Mt e ~
wartime prohibition was oeciArea
constitutional. F+
Supporting in every way the sls~
tentions of the Government and cNa-
gress, just as the opinion OF the Gods
did when wartime prohibition was de-
clared constitutional by unanimous
vote, the decree of the supreme trt@
bunal apparently means a real bone
dry nation. Likewise: II dispels the
hope of the liquor interests for any
fitting of the lid either at present or
under constitutional prohibition, IL is
believed here.
Billion Dollars Involved.
The financial interests involved M
the decision today are est mated at
81 900 ,000, 900 by liquor attorneys. tn-
cluding the amount of near-beor en-
hand and the property for It's manu-
facture, which will be rendered vfr-
tuaIly useless. One hope of the iiluo-
| interests was to convert many old
time breweries into plants for tho
making of the 2.75 product
The New York Federal court up~
held the Volstead law III its definition
Of Intoxicating liauor under wartime
prohibition in a suit brought by kup-
| merit. The appeal was then taken to
| the Supremc Court and the ease
| argued by Eiihu Root on November
The Ruppert brewery conteHded
that Congress exceeded its nHwo- ~
| enacting the volstead law tIrrk fs'
| war time prohibition, beeauer z ite
definition OF Intoxicating li3kY ~
| prohibited the sale ~ tnHmraraf
which Il is claimed are 1r'nf 'n'n eA
ing. Tho attorneys sot snt ~ ~
that 2.75 per cent beer was rot tn
toxicating and pointed out thst tia
| original wartime prohibition law az.
fected only "beer, wine or other in-s
toxicating malt or vinous liquoE'
Long Argument ny Root.
A loLg argument was made By Root
TO show that the word other" as ap-
pearing in the phrase of the Law
should be carried back to the woras
| sheer" and wine" thus prohibiting
| inc cait OHAg Va ihNSNiN"N'e -
wine.
The Rubbert brewery state. 1tS
property worth s1s,b0O,000 wotld ba
\ rendered worthless by the decisionh,
as well as its stock of near beer, vat
ued at $1,000, 900.
The corporation is a large brewing
| company said to be engaged IN the
manufacture of NOTWITHSTANDING osor
containing more than one-hail y.
per cent of alcohol by volume, put
less than IN pc cert Ncohoi oy
xeisht tho standafd that } ad boon
nxed by president Wilson N iis proe-
iamation OF Deceii bee s,Fl}4.
The counsel for the hrfs1lcr oorpcr-
alton Elihu Ro5s ard " Allan n.
Guthrie, OF New YORK, dSblsred "
presenting the argurnsht % the ser.
nreme Court, thai tho acta upon whieh
,hs ,uit was prad Gated arc not valid
exercIses OF IN, war povers cf Coo.
er.ss and are ubconsututionnl
Justice Brandois fret annsunrsl
the conclusion of the os.rt and ihat
read the cptnirfa -.