The American issue. [volume] (Westerville, Ohio) 1912-19??, 1921-04-08
SpROUL ENFORCEMENT
BILL READY FOR HOPPER
Governors Measure Said to Re-
tain Brooks High License
System
NEITHER SIDE SUITED
Reduct ton in Licenses Threatens
Liquor Mems Monopoly
Seriously

! 9CiiOuoiJ
At the time of the defeat of the
Martin dry law enforcement bill by
the Pennsylvania House of Represen-
tatives it was announced that Gov
ernor Sproul expected to present an
enforcement measure retaining the Ii
cense features of the Brooks law,
which features were particularly de-
sired by the liquor interests. 1t was
no occasion for surprise therefore,
when on March % the Governors
bill was introduced He offers it as
the best thing for enforcement in the
state but most of the drys in the
Legislature do not agree with him,
but on the other hand they are of the
opinion that it is the one bill on the
enforcement subject that under pres
ent conditions can be made into law.
The North American in comment
ing on this phase of the question says:
"The choice is to take it or leave it
and the majority of them can be ex-
pected to take it, The North Amer
lean then presents figures on liquor
revenue which are surprising. The
American says:
Last year, 1920, with the Ma
tional Prohibition Amendment
and the Nolstead national en-
forcement law in effect the states
liquor revenue bounded up again
to total of $1,15o,64o. The Ma
tional Amendment and the Brooks
license law did not interfere with
the states collection of $44o. 305
from the wholesalers, $473. 90
from the retailers, $31,355 from
the bottlers, $203,989 from the
brewers, and 81, 32o from the dis
tllers, and the tendency is said to
be still upward.
The drys insist that this license
feature is a saloon preservative and
can not consistently be drafted on to
a law designed to enforce National
Prohibition. The liquor interests
themselves realize that acceptance OF
license is sort of official sanction
to the liquor traffic and while it is
pointed out that under the Nolstead
code nothing more powerful than
one-half of | per cent beverage can
be legally sold. yet to impose a IL
cense fee upon the sellers Of such
beverages means the perpetuation of
the old liquor organizations. On the
other hand it is reported that the
Governors bill is not entirely salts
factory to the liquor interests whose
lobbyists were solidly against the
Martin bill. Particularly objection
able is the schedule of retail liquor
license fees of one-half the amount
OF those in the old Brooks law. "A
lot more people will take out these
cheap licenses and run the business"
was the alarm spread through the sa-
loonkeepers' crowd.
The saloon interests also felt out
ragged at clause lately inserted in
the bill to authorize inspection of
license houses and the seizure Of in
toxicants found therein. This pro-
vdes that all premises for which IL
cense is granted shall be subject at
all times to inspection by authority
of the judge of the court which has
granted the license, or any prosecut-
ing attorney or mayor of city, for
the purpose of ascertaining whether
Intoxicating liquor is kept upon the
premises, and any such liquor found
thereon may be seized and used as
evidence of violation OF the law.
Liquor in the definition of the Gov
ernor's bill is a vinous, spirituous.
malt or brewed liquor fit for beverage
purposes, which cons.ins a smaller
percentage of alcohol than that dcs-
ignated by act of Congress from time
to time as Intoxicating
Requirements of the Brooks law that
the license court in passing upon an
application shall take into considera-
ton the matter of necessity for the
accommodation of the public is cast
aside in the makeup of the Gov
errors measure
The requirement OF bondsmen for
license holders also is eliminated, 1t
is explained that these provisions are
neither necessary or proper in law
regulating the sale of non-intoxicat-
ing drinks.
The bill prohibits granting licenses
to a place for the sale of non-intoxi-
eating drinks which is a resort for
minors. Licensed saloons shall not