The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1928-09-06
BY WILLIAM PHILIP sIMMs,

plan, and herewith presents the second
system.
BY WILLIAM PHILIP SIMMS,
Foreign Editor, Scripps Howard Newspapers
STOCKHOLM, Sept. 6. - "You
have cut booze consumption In two,
reduced crime by more than half
and sobered up the young folks, &C
cording to police records, from an
index figure of 100 to II. How did
you do it?"
put this question to DR.. Ivan
Bratt, the man who has solved the
booze puzzle for Sweden.
just turned so, DR.. Bratt looks
much younger. His hair is sandy
and his clean shaven face glowed
with the ruddiness of perfect health.
His green-gray eyes reminded me of
others 1 had seen-those Of Marshal
Joffre and Mark Twain-a fighter
and organizer and a philosopher.
Out of courtesy to me, DR.. Bratt
had ordered small glass Of near
beer. But he hardly touched it. He
is certainly not a drinking man,
even if he is the one who has kept
prohibition out Of Sweden.
Becomes Temperance Advocate
IT began my career as a practic-
ing physician" DR.. Bratt said. GAS
such, saw the ravages of I'M
controlled liquor. I witnessed the
poverty, misery, crime, insanity and
unhappiness it can produce. This
led me to a study of the problem,
and I became known as a tenn
perance advocate and social re-
former.
Sentiment naturally was driven
to favor prohibition. A plebiscite
taken in 1909 resulted in 100000
votes in favor, as against only TO-
600 opposed.
i, was heartily in favor of the
general aims of prohibition, but 1
could not help doubling the en-
forced ability of laws demanding
total abstinence. They seemed
totally to disregard the human, all
important element.
Il held then, and hold now, that
you cannot enforce prohibition as
long as any large portion Of re-
spectacle society refuses to regard
the moderate consumption of
alcohol as a crime. Any law, to be
effective, must have the backing of
public opinion.
Fate Aids Doctor
oddly enough, Fate itself con-
spired to strengthen, if not to prove
my contention. The Bratt system.
of liquor control was given its first
trial in 1913. At that time our
rationing system allowed an aver
age OF two quarts of spirits family
Cor passbook holder) a month, and
already we were beginning to no
tice decidedly beneficial effect.
But the war made it impossible
for us to get grains and other raw
materials, so pretty soon we had
what amounted to total prohibition
forced upon us. We had liquors
enough only for medicinal pur-
poses.
"At first prohibition worked
wonders. Drunkenness fell off
sharply. So did crime. Then some
thing happened. Rum runners ap-
peared off our coasts. Bootleggers
became active. There was a pop
ular demand and they met it for
the big money there was in it.
Things went from bad to worse
During the three years of war time
restrictions, crime more than
doubled.
"Then came the end of the war
and our control system went back
to normal. At once the bootleggers
began to disappear, as did the
noonShine stills and rum runners.
simultaneously drunkenness fell off
amazingly and so did crime.
Sentiment Changes
Slowly but surely our prohibi-
tionists are coming to share the
same view. In 1922, in another pro-
hibition plebiscite, the vote was
. 889 900. for and $4,000 against. In
1909, remember, the vote had gone
virtually unanimously for prohibi-
ton.
IT believe the vast majority Of the
pepole of the world want temper
ance and high degree Of public
morality. They abhor drunkenness
and its attendant evils. They OPP
pose saloons. They wish to promote
law and order. Prohibition does not
seem to be the answer to these
problems, whereas, with us, at least,
strict control has given decidedly
beneficial results.
why? This brings us right back
to the human element. Prohibition
ignores the human side of the prob
lem. Our system is based entirely
upon it,"
Next: How the Bratt system works.