The evening herald. [volume] (Albuquerque, New Mexico) 1914-1922, 1920-01-05
SALE Of 2.75
PER CENT BEER
IS ILlEGA
u. S. Supreme Court
Withers Last Fading
Hope Of the Vets

WAsTIISGTON. Jan. 5.-The SUI
preme court today declared oonstitu-
ulnai sections OF the Volsicad prohl-
billion enforcement act prohibiting tho
manufacture and sale Of 'buer. vino
or other Intoxicating malt or vinous
liquors." containing one half Of one
per cent or more OF alcohol.
Beer containing ais per cent %
alcohol Is Illegal under the war limo
prohibition act. the supreme court
also decided.
Dismissal By the lower court IN
New York OF injunction proceedings
brought TO restrain government or-
flcials from interfering with Jacob
l,uppert. a brewer, IN the manufactur-
of beer containing approximately
2.s5 per cent alcohol. but alleged 70
be non-intoxicating. wns sastained.
Oouri Divided to {.
Associate Justice Brandeis who rem
dered the opinion OF the court said
the right Of congress to suppress tho
liquor traffic was not an implied
power. but power expressly granted.
The court divided. TO Z, Associate
Justices Day Vandevanter. CLARK ana
McReynolds dissenting.
Under the war emergency congress-
has a right TO stop Immediately tho
sale Of intoxicating liquor. the court
held.
Justice Mcl,eynolds m dissenting
opinion said that the eighteenth
amendment had not yet come into 81
IUWf unI FhuN A saIftH
had no general power to prohibit tho
manufacture and Eale OF liquor.
Justice McReynolds took the posi-
tiQu that the war emergency under
which national prohibition was made
effective had pusscF
Indictment brought against tho
standard brewery at Baltimore and
the American brcwinE company az
New Orleans FOR manufacturing ais
per cent beer before the war time pro-
hihitun enforcement act became of-
tccttyc. were ordered dismissed
summary of Opinion.
1T the war power Of congress TO
effectively prohibit the manufacture
and safe OF Intoxicating liquors in or
der 10 promote the nations efficiency
In men, munitions and supplies is as
full and complete as the police power
OF the states to effectively enforce
such prohibition In order 10 promote
the health. safety and mora;s OF tho
communliy." tho majority opinion
Siid. 1T Is clear that this provision
OF tho Nolstead act Is valid and has
rendered immnternl the question
whether plaintiff's beer is intoxicai-
ing. For the legislation and decisions
Of the highest courts OF nearly an OF
the states establish that % H. deemed
impossible to effectively enforce cith-
er prohibitory laws or other laws
merely regulating the manufacture
and sale OF intoxicating liquors, II
liability or inclusion within the law
Is made TO depend upon the isuaide
fact whether or not "A pprticular liq-
uor made or sold as a beverage u In
toNicating.
THAT the federal government
would. In attempting 10 enforce n
| prohibitory law, be confronted with
difficulties similar to those encourt-
cred by the states is obvious; and
/ bot this experience OF the states aud
the need Of the federal government
I OF Legislation defining Intoxicating
liquors as was done In the Nolsttad
act was clearly aet forth In the re-
ports Of the house judiciary commit
! tee. Furthermore, tho
attorney general calling attention
[ specifically 20 the claim made in ra-
spoct to the 2.75 per cent beer. hg.i
pointed out 10 congress that defini
tiun Of intoxicating liquor by tiNoi
standards was essential 20 effective
enforcement % the prohibition law.
n Is therefore clear both that con-
gress might reasonably havo conald-
cred some legislative definition OF in
toNicating liquor 10 be essential e.
effective enforcement Of prohibition
aud also that the definition provided
(Continued on page twoD