The Waterbury Democrat., 1935-03-26
Efforts Being Made To Unite Eligibles
 In District Group
Campaign Opens to Obtain Modification of Liquor . Laws-Three-POint Program Outlined in Bulletin ! No. 1 Published Here TOday-Lauria, Secretary

Formation of a new liquor deai- nrs organization in the Waterbury area became known today when fhe Fifth District Retail Liquor Dealers Association of Connecttcu: Issued it's first official bulletin. The association, with Lewis Lauria as secretary and organizer, has many Well-known tavern and restaurant owners as members of It's tempor' hry advisory board.
 Bulletin No. of the association calls for consideration of three points in connection with liquor laws in eastern states. Repeal or 1egislation, ordering patrons to pc seated while drinking. Is pralseo' < permits for sale of beer only m several state are attacked; the ac- fion of the Pennsylvania liquor commission in forbidding dealers to offer gifts to induce the purchase Of iiuuor is warmly commented.
 Charter Members
 Those listed as members of the advisory board are: William Kur- ten. Albert Drescher, James Burns, Mike Neck, William Brown, George Muiligan, Timothy Moynihan, Rocco A. Diorio, T. J. Donnelly, Mrs Annie Healey, Mrs Thomas Shields, Patsy Brown, Charles Eammell, John Butler, Jerry Scorpion, Ernest Belval, Harmon Genlot. Philip Becker, Mrs Louise Book. William Butkus, Harvey Lemieux, Thomas Farncis McGrath and J. J. Murphy.
 First Bulletin:
 Individually, voters and taxpay- CTS. and collectively, as a group truly representtive of those most vitaily interested in the proper reg ulation of the liquor business. we ask your careful consideration of the following facts:
 1. Massachusetts, New York, and Pennsylvania have repealed legislation compelling persons to be seated while drinking. This regulation has been grossly and justifiably ridiculed. Any like en- croachment on the individual lib- critics of Connecticut citizens will doubtlessly incur more pronounc- ed antipathy. It is utterly impos- gibie to enforce such restriction.
 2. Separate Beer Licenses for those unqualified to dispense liquor have met with acute disfavor in Delaware, Maryland, Rhode 1s- land, New York, and Pennsylvania. The uncomfortable tendency for fhesA Exclusively Beer Permittees is to sell liquor illicitly. On De- cember 14, 1894, Judge Gawthrop, Dean Thompson, and MT Wagner, liquor commissioner of Pepnsyl- vania conferred with representa- fiveD of the state and national as- sociations and Unanimously ap- proved the abolition of the beer license and the introduction of the one license. They declared the separate Der license too expensive to control.
 3. On November 10th, the Pennsylvania Liquor Commission 1sued bulletin No which reads in part as follows: Ut shall be unlaw- full for any licensee, etc., to offer or give anything of value, etc, to induce the purchase of liquor or for any other purpose whatsoever in connection with the sale of such liquor
 It is our contention that this regulation has direct leaning to- ward true temperance.
 The position of liquor commis- sioner should be a full time oc- cupation. Close contact with lic- < ensees insures proper regulation. Those who cannot give their all should not qualify as commission CTS. There should be at least one to each congressional district.
 If more attention were given the ultimate consumer (who is inevit- ably the one who pays for alD than to the Vets or the Drys, our liquor legislation problem would be solved.
 Respectfully.
 LEWIS s. LAURA, #i National Secretary