Evening star., 1933-01-20
Safeguards Must Be Insured.

Safeguards Must Be Insured.
Every Washingtonian, whether he IS
for beer and against the saloon or for
beer and for the saloon, or against both
beer and the saloon, will be anxious
that the local beer bill shall have the
community benefit of every safeguard
possible against the return OF the
obvious and conceded evils Of the old
saloon system.
Since residents of the District are not
represented in their National and local
legislature and do not participate d.
rectly in the making of laws which gov
ern them, the necessity Is greater and
more urgent that they scan closely pro-
posed beer legislation for the District
and by respectful criticism help to put
the enactment in shape to inflict min
lmum of harm and confer the maximum
Of benefit upon the unrepresented COM
munity
The local Crusaders have suggested
some changes in the original Black beer
bill to this end. They propose. for in
stance, that instead of giving to the Su-
perintendent of Licenses the unlimited
power Of issuing licenses to the sellers
of beer, this authority be given instead
to the Commissioners who may also
promulgate their own rules and regula-
tions mot inconsistent with law" for
the operation of the licensees business.
There is also written into the bill as a
proposed amendment the specific pro-
vision that the Commissioners may
satisfy themselves as to the financia,
responsibility and moral character of
the e7ylicant for license.
While the Commissioners by their
own regulation might forbid the sale
Of beer to minors. stipu-ate proper clos
ing hours, forbid the establishment of
beer selling places in certain districts
including residential (as was done un-
der the old high license law) and may
prevent establishment of such places
within specified distance of churches,
schools, asylums, Soldiers Home or
soldiers barracks would 1t not be far
better to include such restrictions in
the law itself, thus guaranteeing those
safeguards beyond doubt? Would not
failure so to include them in law en-
courage legal dispute as to the extent
Of the Commissioners authority?
The Crusaders, in their proposed
amendment, wisely eliminate "eating
places" from those qualified to be
licensed for sale Of beer to be con-
sumed on the premises, specifying
bona fide restaurants, clubs or hotels"
That is a commendable change. al
though it is obvious that there should
be further stipulation of when ho.el
or club ceases to be bona fide" hotel
or cub and becomes non-bona fde
hotel or club.
Section IL of the rewritten bill, which
IS the same as section 6 of the Black
bill, provides that mo brewer, manu-
facturer, wholesaler or distributor shall
have any direct or indirect financial
interest in the business of any licensee."
To make sure that the desirable aim
of this provision is effective should
not the ownership of the premises on
which beer business is to be con-
Quoted also be covered?
The section Of the proposed new bill
(section 15) should be clarified and
strengthened as to its provisions for fine
and imprisonment. The proposed bill
provides a fine of not less than 81 900
or imprisonment in Jail for year. or
both, and revocation of license in the
case Of licensee, for violation Of any
provisions of the act. But if a ncensee
willfully violates the regulations promul-
gated by the Commissioners, he would
merely be subject to revocation of his
license for a year. If the sale Of beer
to minors was merely prohibited under
a Commissioners regulation, while the
beer law itself requires monthly re-
port of the quantity Of beer sold. it
would be possible that the ncensee who
sold beer to minor would escape pun
1shment with the loss of his license for
year. while the licensee who faEified
the amount of beer sold in a month or
failed to make his report would face
a year In jail. There is no reason for
this discrepancy in penalties, and it is
a question whether the penalties, at
least for violation of the Commission
ers' regulations, should not be made
more severe, leaving to the courts the
degree of severity with which they will
be applied under the circumstances.
The new amendments propose that
the local tax on beer be reduced to
$1.20 from the Black bills original pro-
posal OF $3.50 barrel. 1t is under
stood that this change was dictated BY
the fact that Maryland is now con-
sidering the imposition of 6o-cent a
barrel State tax, and that New York Is
discussing another figure based on per-
centage of beer sold, and that the $3.50
figure for the District might be, rela-
lively, exorbitant. In addition, those
who would profit from the sale of beer
are naturally in favor of lowering the
tax. The matter of tax presents one
Of the surprising features Of proposed
liquor legislation. Before prohibition
the tax or license was conceived as one
instrument to discourage the consump-
tion of alcoholic drinks. and the license
was made higher and higher with the
purpose and result Of reducing the
number Of saloons. But now there Is
fear that If the tax or license is too
high, the sale of beer will not be suffi-