Evening star., 1933-07-02
Kentucky Making
Prohibition History
After Own Fashion
First State to Pass on
Legality of Beer, but
Delays Repeal Vote.
Special Dispatch to The Star.

Special Dispatch to The Star.
LOUISVILLE, KY, July ken
tucky, without participating in the re-
peal tidal wave, has been making pro-
hibition history after her own fashion.
She Is the first State to pass upon the
legality Of the 80 amendment to the
Volstead act and the first State to
bring litigation upon that question to
the doorstep Of the Supreme Court of
the United States.
Although the ruling of the State
courts upholding the power OF Congress
SO to amend the act may not be OF
great moment to a Federal court, it
was necessary for that issue to be de-
cided in order to determine whether
the new beverage could be manufac-
tured, bought, sold and drunk in Ken
lucky
It is an anomaly that the ruling
went in favor of beer in the face OF
the existence Of stringent enforce
ment act. All that saved it was the
omission from this law of the deflni-
ton of an intoxicating liquor. Lower
and upper courts wrote almost parallel
opinions After concluding that Con-
gress had the right to amend the Vol
stead act, there still remained the
State amendment and the State en-
forcement law. modelled on the Vol
stead law. to be considered. The
learned judges held that in view OF the
fact that the State law did not define
an Intoxicating drink by stipulated
percentum, it could be defined only
by the facts of experience. Both
courts agreed that its personal con-
sumption in the Largest practicable
quantities" did not produce intoxica-
ton: ergo. it was no intoxicating bev-
erage and could enter the channels OF
industry as soft drink:
Two other interesting liquor decisions
were handed down by the Court OF Ap-
peals just before it adjourned this
month. One, flowing naturally from
the decision that 80 beer is soft
drink, was the ruling that retailers
don't have to pay SIS annual state
malt liquor law. This decision was
a heavy blow to the tax gatherers.
They had already collected $4,000
from this source and were obliged to
refund it ALL Especially was it hard
ship upon county clerks. Deprived OF
the usual volume of fees from title
and mortgage recording and other busi-
ness transactions, they had been de-
pending on their share Of the beer tax
to pay for the operation Of their Of
fices. After returning this revenue to
the retailers, some of the clerks found
themselves strapped for ofiicial running
expenses.
The other decision was to the effect
that even in the event of repeal of the
eighteenth amendment. shipment OF
whisky. except for medicinal purposes,
remains prescribed in Kentucky ss long
as the State amendement is on the
books. The effect is more technical
than real. Even under prohibition,
Kentucky has been making about so
per cent of the nations supplies and
since the liberalization OF physicians
prescriptions rules by Congress, ship
ments have materially increased.
In order to bring the question before
the distillers, argued that the State
might lose its distilling industry be-
cause Kentucky, under her constitu-
tion. cannot possibly vote on State re-
neal until 1885 despite the possibility of
national repeal in 1884. He contended
that business might be lost If export
for beverage purposes is banned until
the voters have acted on State repeal.
Generally, however, the length of
time required for the manufacture and
aging of whisky was regarded as
safeguard aginst the loss OF the indus
try to competition organized elsewhere.
This period of time will afford the
voters ample opportunity to take action.
Outside of the courts. one of the
most significant utterances indicating
the trend of public opinion appeared in
a recent issue of the Elizabethtown
News, q we'll edited and influential ru-
raj publication, that has never been
known to give aid and comfort to the
vets. To those familiar with the pol
ley Of the paper, its pronouncement
on the return Of beer was revolution
arv. - H. B.