The American issue. [volume] (Westerville, Ohio) 1912-19??, 1922-06-16

nent' by the Hon. A. J. Nolstead so
atively discusses Prohibition enforce
eft of our readers herewith in full.
statutes were amended so as to pro-
hibit by name all liquor, such as beer,
wine, whisky and other known bev-
erages, without reference to the guam
tity OF alcohol they contained. This
had been the policy for many years
prior to the adoption OF the national
Prohibition Amendment The neces-
sity for this is apparent.
Mr.. Justice Brandeis, in speaking
for the supreme court, said, in regard
to this necessity, in Rupert vs.. Caf-
fey (25l u. S. 264); For the lcgisla-
ton and decisions of the highest
courts of nearly all of the states es-
tablish that it is deemed impossible
to effectively enforce either prohibi-
tory laws or other laws merely regu-
lating the manufacture and sale of in
toXicating liquors, if liability or inclu-
sion within the law is made to depend
upon the issuable fact whether or not
particular liquor made or sold as a
beverage is Intoxicating. In other
words it clearly appears that liquor
law to be capable OF effective en-
forcement must, in the opinion of the
legislatures and courts of the several
states, be made to apply either TO all
liquors of the species enumerated, like
beer, ale or wine, regardless OF the
presence or degree of alcoholic con-
tent; or, if more general description
is used such as distilled, rectihed.
spritpous, iermented malt or brewed
liquors within that general descrip-
ton, regardless of alcoholic content;
and often several such standards are
combined so that certain specific and
generic liquors are altogether forbid
den and such liquors as contain
given percentage of alcohol
The question of what percentage of
alcohol in beer or other liquor makes
it Intoxicating cannot be answered.
There is and can be no decision on
that subject. The statement in circu-
lation by wet organizations that the
government has admitted or the su-
preme court has held that the beer
containing 2 3-4 per cent of alcohol
is not Intoxicating is absolutely false
and without the slightest foundation.
The object, and only object, of in
creasing such contents is to make it
Intoxicating.
Homes Would Be Debauched y
The principal article sold in every
saloon was beer. 1t was the. one thing
upon which that institution depended
and upon which it lived, so much so
that saloons were often called beer
saloons. 1t represented over 90 per
cent Of the volume of the trade. The
brewers in many sections owned
most of the saloons, furnished the IL
cense money! and practically en-
ployed those who conducted the busi-
ness. 1t is quite freely admitted by
the beer and wine advocates that with
the sale of beer and wine the saloon
would return. To avoid this, knowing
that the public is opposed to the
saloons, they propose that no beer or
wine shall be consumed at the place
of sale, but only for consumption in
the homes. Those who propose this
show how utterly ignorant they as
sumo the public to be of the nature of
the traffic. A law such as that would
mean that the consumption of these
liquors would have to take place be-
yond any police supervision or con-
troll. 1t would drive the traffic into
all sorts of hidden haunts and debauch
the home to an extent never possible
under the saloon system.
The advocates of the sale of beer
and wine are presuming upon the ig
norance of the public as to the effect
of their proposed policy. But the pub
lie is not as easily deceived as they
assume. Many years ago Massachu-
setts tried a prohibitory law under
which beer was permitted to be sold,
but it proved such an utter failure
that it was repealed after trial of
three years. 1t was attended with
every evil that attends the unrestricted
sale of liquor. Not only was beer
sold, but so was every other kind of
liquor. Michigan adopted Prohibition
by a majority vote of $4,000. A year
later, when this camouhage PROPOSE