Evening star., 1936-11-17
FEDERAL LIQUOR
ATTITUDE SCORED
Dry States Neglected, Pre-
Repeal Promise Broken,
I.P. A. Report.
srecial Dispatch to The Star.

Special Dispatch 10 Inc StdT.
NEW YORK, November 1.-THE
Federal Government was accused to-
day of neglecting its pre-repeal prom
ise to protect dry States and prevent
the return of the old-tin1e saloon.
These guarantees have been subordi-
mated to desire for liquor tax rev.
enues, it was charged.
The accusations are contained in a
report of a two-year study conducted
by the Institute of Public Admins
tration an endowed. non-profit max
ing, scientific research organization
afiliated with Columbia University.
Luther Gulick. director of the in
stitute. said his organization pre-
sents the report, not because 1t has
any interest in the liquor problem
as such, but because the key to sue
cess or failure is apparently in ad-
ministration."
The Federal Government, said
the report, has done little to pro-
tect dry States, even though legislative
authority to act in this connection is
not wanting.
Revenue vital f0ncy.
What mattered most to the Fed
eral authorities was the collection of
liquor taxes and the elimination of
the bootlegger as a tax evader. Rev.
policy. The Government is always
ready to furnish its S25 license in
the form of an occupational stamp
tax, to the old-fashioned saloon as
we'll as to any new and improved type
of drinking establishment.
Moreover, the stamp is granted to
saloons in dry States as well as in the
wet ones. And for year and half,
under law since repealed, an addi-
tlonal penalty charge of $1,000 was
imposed for the privilege of exhibiting
the Federal stamp on the premises of
a saloon IN dry State! Thus, the
aspirations and pledges most stressed
before repeal. rejection of the saloon
and protection of dry States, have
turned out to be the least important
elements in the Federal Governments
activities relating to liquor"
The report was critical of the fact
liquor control had been placed under
jurisdiction of State departments Of
public welfare, causing "subordina-
ton of the social implications of
liquor control to the revenue aspect.
The system of centralized State con-
troll, however, proved beneficial"
from the administrative standpoint,
the report found.
Local Role Positive.
Speaking a good word for certain
aspects of local option, the reporl
declared the benefits of such a sys-
tenn were most apparent when local
governments assume a positive roe in
tightening restrictions on liquor SELL
ing to conform with prevailing atti-
tudes among the people within their
Jurisdictions"
The key to successful liquor con-
troll" the report declared, lis the
investiture of adequate discretionary
powers in the regulatory body. Ii
liquor control administration is to
work positively toward a progressive
elevation of standards. and not mega
lively, merely guarding against in
fractions of the lews and regulations,
full discretion to grant and revoke
licenses and to promulgate rules
must not only be given in the first
place but must also be preserved
against attrition of any kind"
State liquor control authorities, it
was found, are less likely to issue
licenses "indiscriminately" than are
local licensing authorities.
Nevertheless" the institute de-
clared, "inasmuch as the local officials
are most familiar with the needs of
their communities, a system is desir-
able whereby the local authorities
indicate the limitation but the State
authority has the power to issue
licenses to that limit"