Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1934-12-03
|DRY CONTROVERSY
HELD NOT SETTLED
Sharp Differences of 0pin-
ion Exist as to Post.Pro-
hibition Merits.
BY DAVID LAWRENCE.

BY DAVID LAWRENCE.
While one year has elapsed since
the repeal OF the eighteenth amend
ment, the truth Is the prohibition
controversy has by no means been
repealed.
There are sharp differences Of opin-
ion today as 20 the merit of the post
prohibition era from a sociological
and economic viewpoint. These diff
ferences cannot be easily resolved nor
can opinion be crystallized until the
transition from a period of lawless
distribution of alcoholic beverages to
a legalized sale has been fully made.
Few Predictions True.
Few of tn, predictions made before
repeal have proved true. For in
stance:
l. Taxes have by no means brought
the revenues expected nor the lend
of the depression. as so extravagantly
promised by overenthusiastic cham
pions Of repeal.
2. Bootlegging and gangster crime
have by no means been repealed.
3. Local autonomy and State rule
have not been brought about, and the
Federal Government still controls the
liquor problem and is as derelict in
enforcement as it was before.
There nave been, on the other
hand, some affirmative results:
/. Employment has been given d.
rectly and indirectly to persons en-
gagged in making of bottles, beer. fix
lures for retail stores etc. and income
60 iyo i,a
alcoholic beverages has been in
creased.
2. Cities and States have begun to
realize that. with the advent OF re-
peal, their responsibilities from So
cial viewpoint are greater and must
be exercised with much more skill
than even in the pre-prohibition eras.
3. Much of the revenues which the
bootleggers got has been diverted to
the Federal Treasury and has aided
the budgets of States and cities.
But it is fact that, after a year
of repeal no State or city has worked
out a perfect system, or rather one
that other localities feel would be
applicable to them.
Bootlegging Easier.
Bootlegging has in a sense been
made easier. For the transportation
of liquor shipments on trains and
by motor truck is so general that legal
and illegal consignments can be easily
mingled and detection is rendered
doubly difficult. Also, with the open
selling of legalized products, the dis
tribution of illegal products on which
no tax has been paid has also been
made simpler.
The lawful industry has had hard
time fighting an overzealous bureau
cracy and the bootlegger at the same
time. Instead of concentrating on
those who are engaged in Illicit sale,
the governmental bodies in many
States and in the Federal Government
have given most of their time and at
tention to the companies that pay
taxes and abide by the rules.
This is due to the fact that the
problem of liquor control in the Fed
eral Government is not centered in
any commission or bureau. but that
different parts Of the Government.
from agriculture to internal revenue
to the Federal Alcohol Control Ad-
mtnistration, all have something to
say about the liquor business.
The popular belief was that the
Federal Government would hand the
problem back to the States But it
turns out that under the national in
dustrial recovery act, and the code
system. the Federal Government can
exercise a closer supervision of the
liquor traffic than it did under the
eighteenth amendment
The question Of keeping lawful and
unlawfully made liquor from enter
ing States that have not repealed
their dry laws is a Federal question
under the twenty-frst amendment.
as is also the matter of controlling
liquor importations at the Canadian
and Mexican borders and on the sea-
coasts. But national policy. never
theless, to prevent smuggling has
hardly been well defined.
Excessive Use Varies.
So far as social consequences of
repeal are concerned, it is apparent
that statistics as to arrests for in
toXlcation or reckless driving. due to
the excessive use of stimulants by au-
tomobile drivers, vary throughout the
country and in some cities will show
considerable increase in the last
year. There are no doubt as many
people who do not believe in strong
drink as there were year ago. but
there are other people who do not
themselves drink but who rejoice that
the liquor traffic has been driven out
of speakeasies and back-room bars
into the open.
One year is hardly a fair test for
so important problem as the best
way to handle the liquor traffic. Liquor
legislation of one kind or another is
more than $50 years old in America
and possibly 800 years old throughout
the world. The American people did
not vote for unrestricted distribution
of alcoholic beverages when they re-
pealed the eighteenth amendment.
They did vote for a saner and better
method of distributing beverages to
those who could drink them without
injury to fellow members Of society.
And the better method Is still in
process of being sought.