OCR Text |
Show Shall America liwe " " It is stated that Mr. Garner and Mr. Snell are of the opinion that a beer bill can be enacted before New Year's Day. Be it so, wliat then? It is claimed that the purpose in passing beer legislation is to raise revenue. A beer tax levy, it is pointed out, bears an essential relation re-lation to the tax levy measures on other things which are usually enacted en-acted near the close of the session. Furthermore, it is claimed that the percentage of alcohol in beer is the crux ' In the legalization of beer. One group, with its mind on the possible action of the Supreme Court, advocates only 2 per cent of alcohol in beer. This is slop, says another group, and it won't sell. If it won't sell, say the drys, it won't raise revenue, so why legalize le-galize it? For its legalization will open the doors to an orgy in bootlegging boot-legging beer of high alcoholic content con-tent which will be worse than anything any-thing we now have. Thus there will be constant war between the legitimate dealer on the one hand, and the illegitimate dealer on the other, which will call for an increased in-creased law enforcement personnel. Another group contends that beer of 3 to 4 per cent alcohol content will kill the bootlegging business. But, say some, a bill legalizing, le-galizing, a beer of 34 to ihi per cent alcoholic content is more likely to be declared unconstitutional. unconstitu-tional. And, say others, the avowed avow-ed purpose of legalizing beer is to increase our revenue, and a bill putting a tax on beer of any alcoholic alco-holic content, either with or without with-out the Eighteenth Amendment, will defeat its purpose. Those who advocate beer legislation claim that it will raise a revenue of $250,000 -000 to $350,000,000 per annum. But. say the opponents, since the 1-ea-eral Government is not able to abolish beer rackets now, this $250.-000,000 $250.-000,000 to $350,000,000 margin between be-tween bootleg beer and legalized beer of any alcoholic content is a goodly sum to attract beer racketeers. Moreover, they claim that a tax high enough to raise so much revenue re-venue will require dealers to sell beer in bottles at $0.90 per gallon in case lots. Whereas, it is said that "home brewers" can make 5 to 6 per cent beer for $0.20 a gallon, gal-lon, and -bottle it in five gallon quantities. How many persons, they ask. who have learned the art nf making 5 to 6 per cent home brew will be willing to buy beer, even with the same alcoholic content, at $0.90 per gallon? You can't keep your cake in the larder and eat it, say the opponents oppon-ents of beer legalization. If you want beer legalized to drive the bootlegger out of existence you must make it and distribute it at a cost lower than he can make it and distribute it. If we look at the experience of other countries, say the drys. we can profit thereby. In England beer is now taxed until its consumption con-sumption is greatly reduced and tax returns lessened. In tills coim-j try such a condition would be fins for the bootlegger. In Finland high taxes on intoxicating intoxi-cating beverages have increased rum running and bootlegging along with illicit distilling. A revenue on beer is the margin of profit which will keep the bootlegger boot-legger in business. It will also engender en-gender strife between the legal i venders of beer and the illegal venders on the one hand and organized or-ganized society with its investigators, investi-gators, police officers arjd courts on the other. Outlaw the traffic as now obtains ob-tains and the bootlegger will continue con-tinue to ply his vice and trade until un-til moral sentiment is strong enough to drive him out of it. It is the position of the dry element that moral sentiment against the vice and crime of a legalized traffic traf-fic in strong beverages is likely never to become an all-prevailing factor in society. The hope, they say, lies in persistent education as to its baneful effects upon the human hu-man body and social welfare and the traffic against it regorously enforced. Those who favor immediate beer legislation and repeal of the Eighteenth Eight-eenth Amendment assert that human hu-man appetites for intoxicating beverages cannot be regulated by law without destroying respect for all law; that if beer and other intoxicating in-toxicating drinks are legalized respect for all law may be again prevalent; that those who engage in the sale of beer, wines and liquors li-quors will strongly support the Government In driving out the competitive bootlegger; that the tax and licenses will be far in excess ex-cess of the present cost of controlling control-ling what is now a vice in the traffic. |