Evening star., 1951-04-01


much as I give"
would have authorized the County
Council to impose a tax on all
alcoholic beverages sold in the
county.
Asks Measure Be Killed.
On March 8, however, Senator
Hyde announced he had asked
1.-THE Senate Judiciary Committee
to kill the measure, in response
to a wave of opposition from
county civic groups. His action
came a day before a public hear
ing was scheduled in Bethesda.
Five days later. identical bills
sponsored by Mr.. Tawes to elimi-
nate the county's wholesale beer
monopoly were dropped in the
House and Senate hoppers.
Mr.. Erwin, who strongly defends
the present system. said the
boards beer division carries about
% domestic and four foreign
brands.
I'VE even have brands that can
not be bought in Prince Georges
County" he said.
He explained the board places
the same percentage of markup on
every brand it sells to retailers,
but its profit varies with the
brewery price.
Even Cites Survey.
Mr.. Erwin said a board survey
of 80 retail outlets in Washington
early this year revealed the price
from the wholesaler to the retailer
on such beers as Schlitz. Pabst
and Blatz averaged 10 to IS cents
per case higher than the boards
price to county retailers.
On such beers as Gunther and
Senate, the wholesale price to the
retailer was about the same in the
District as it is in Montgomery
County, he added.
And on the retail level, the
price in Montgomery to con-
sumers was found to be on par
with Washington.
Opponents of the Montgomery
beer monopoly claim many county
residents buy their beer in Wash
ington because it is cheaper. Mr.
Erwin, however, insisted price is
not a factor.
"We feel such a practice exists
because they work in the District
and it is more convenient for them
to buy there" Mr.. Erwin de-
clared. But. even so, our busi.
ness is increasing
1 He maintained that the only
way beer consumption could be
increased in the county would be
to increase sharply the number
of retail license holders.
Charges Are Denied.
! On the other side of the fence
Mr.. Raney, who is president o1
the Valley Forge Distributing Co
lof Maryland, heatedly denied
charges by supporters of the beer
monopoly that he put pressure or
Mr.. Tawes to try to change the
system.
II don't owe Mr.. Tawes anything
and he owes me nothing" he said
I'm fact, don't even know wheth.
er I would go into business ir
Montgomery County if the inonop.
oily is abolished. My opposition te
the present system is based on the
county going into private busi-
ness"
He also disputed Mr.. Erwin.
statement about beer price.
in Washington and Montgomery
; County.
II am interested in this matter
. as taxpayer. with about half {
million dollars worth of CONNER.
cial property in the Silver Sprins
area" he said. II would be foolish
to do anything that would los,
revenue for the county and resul
in tax increase for me-"
Issue Seen Statewide.
: Mr.. Coffman said the issue wa
p, Statewide, adding that Mont
gomery is the only county il
: Maryland as well as in the entir,
country to have a monopoly owe,
the wholesaling of beer.
why should the % othe,
counties in Maryland be penal
!, lied because they are paying tn,
State a normal revenue from it.
beer tax and we are not? I DOM
favor any law that permits 9
, county to secede from the State
or to compete with private bus.
mess"
u From Mr.. Dietle came thu
charge that the present system
is "un-American" and curbs com.
petition and free enterprise. He
said he believed retailers woulc
be charged less for their beer Il
the county is thrown open tn nri.