Evening star., 1932-12-20
BEER AND REPEAL
| HARD TO SEPARATE
Each Seen as Impeding the
Other When Not Considered
Together.
BY MARK SULLIVAN.

BY MARK SULLIVAN.
It is universally accepted that the
Collier beer bill will have majority IN
the vote which is due to come soon In
the House. That is about as far as
certainly goes. 1t ma yor may not have
a ma lority in the vote which will come
in the Senate some time after the
holidays In neither branch OF Con-
gress is there the two-thirds necessary
to pass the legalization over President
Hoover's veto-if he should veto 1t.
If for any reason beer fails at the
present session, which lasts until March
session of the new Congress which. it
is now universally assumed, President
elect Roosevelt must call soon after
March A. In that special session beer
apparently should have no difficulty.
The new House will be very strongly
Democratic and very strongly wet. The
new Senate will be fairly strongly
Democratic and at least strongly enough
wet to provide a majority for beer
Finally, the new President will. OF
course, favor beer. in accordance with his
party platform. The sum of all is that
if beer is not legaliZed in the present
Congress before March 4, it seems fairly
certain to be legalized in the new Con-
gress, probably as early as June at the
outside.
Nevertheless. neither beer nor the
complete repeal of the eighteenth
amendment are making as rapid prog
ress as was expected after the NoVem-
Der election. The slowing up Is due
in part to the relation of the two to
each other. 1t turns out to be more
difficult to separate them in practice
and in legislation than was assumed
when the Democratic platform prom
1sed the legalizing of beer Immediately
and the complete repeal of the eight
eenth amendment ultimately.
Reasons for Opposition
A clue to the whole situation can be
found in the different reasons why
different groups will vote against or
tacitly work against beer in the House
this week or in the Senate after the
holidays. One group dry, holds sin
cerely that beer having 4 per cent alco-
hel by volume, the figure specified IN
the bill as it now stands, is in tact an
Intoxicating liquor" that beer is there
fore forbidden by the prohibition
amendment, and that 1t can only pe
legalized by repeal of the amendment.
opposed, openly or tacitly, by some
small groups of vets who have various
reasons. One small group OF vets
thinks that if beer is legalized now
good many wet voters and wet drinkers
NAV be satisfied by that, and therefore
the prospect of getting complete repeal
of the prohibition amendment may be
reduced. To the same effect, though
bv a different source Of thinking, an
other group fears that if beer is legal
lied the conditions attending the sale
and consumption of it may stlften up
the dryS and therefore reduce the
chances of later achieving complete re-
peal Of the prohibition amendment
A small group of vets coming from
districts interested in wine have COM
mercial jealousy of beer and hence
have no enthusiasm for a step which !
would legalize beer but continue to pro-
hibit wine Some vets and some COM |
mercial interests related to hard liquors
fear that if beer is legalized now ana
everything else required to wait several
wears for complete repeal OF the pro-
hibition amendment, the result may be
that the brewers will achieve such mo-
mentum and such control of the dis
tribution Of all beverages that pro-
ducerS of other liquors would be at
permanent disadvantage.
A quite considerable group OF
thoughtful vets are troubled about the
notion of legalizing beer in rather
headlong manner, without making
plans for the whole of whatever Is to
be the next status of liquor. Arguing
contrary to the Democratic platform,
they think that legalizing of beer and
complete repeal of the eighteenth
amendment are indissolubly connected
and should be considered and acted
upon at the same time. They feel
that the thoughtful vets should confer
with the moderate drys, and with those
who are neither wet nor dry, with
view to laying out complete program
for the next status OF liquor.
Brewers Blamed Most.
Such a program arrived at by con-
ference would reduce the temptatlon
and opportunity of the extreme drys
to take a recalcitrant stand in thirteen
States and thereby prevent repeal OF
the prohibition amendment. Simply to
legalize beer would be, as respects that
beverage, to go all the way back to
what was the status before the pro-
hibition amendment was adopted IN
attended by evils is clear because other
wise the Nationwide impulse which
resulted in the eighteenth amendment
could hardly have arisen.
In the evils which attended liquor
as whole before 1920. the brewers
were charged with mere blame than
any other manufacturers of liquor. The
brewers were in many cities the owners
of the saloons which were the principal
mechanism for the sale or liquors OF
all kinds. Many conscientious vets re-
call seriously the promises made dur
ing the past few years by conspicuous
leaders of the wet movement that they
had no intention of bringing back the
saloon. Some of those vets fear now
that if beer were legalized the saloon
would Immediately rearise.
According to this apprehension, the
saloon must be set up as means for
the retail distribution of beer. After
and if the eighteenth amendment is
other liquors would be added,
and the saloon would be back in the
same form as before 1920 The busi-
ness of selling liquor would be estab-
lished on a commercial basis, making
difficult the achievement of some kind
of State or other non-profit method of
sale in which many vets believe
All these are considerations which
trouble the minds of many in Con-
gress both wet and dry. The sum of
them accounts not for q fortnight
hostility to legalizing beer, but rather
for hesitancy to do 1t precipitately
Copyright, 1922