PROHIBITION IN AMERICA.
(To rim EDITOR or THE " SPICTATOR."I SIR,—As a further testimony to the actual state of affairs in the United States on the subject of Prohibition, I should like to call the attention of your readers to a striking leading article which appeared in a Canadian paper the other day, the Toronto Globe, headed " A Drying United States." I cannot do better than reproduce the first paragraph of this article :-
" All the organized efforts to discredit and misrepresent pro- hibition in the United States cannot conceal the fact that the supply and consumption of intoxicants are rapidly decreasing. In 1920 the authorities permitted the withdrawal of 12,500,000 gallons of alcoholic liquor from bonded warehouses. Last year only 3,506,000 gallons were withdrawn. This year, it is esti- mated, the total will be 2,000,000 gallons, a large part of it for industrial uses. Just before the adoption of the Federal pro- hibition amendment the annual consumption was 150,000,000 gallons."
The writer goes on to remark that as the private stocks laid in before Prohibition became operative have been depleted, the supply available for beverage purposes would probably have run out already but for boot-legging and smuggling, and that so long as Canada and the British West Indies permit the manufacture and export of liquor, rum-running will continue. Yet, as it is well pointed out, the amount illicitly carried into the United States will be small compared with the former consumption. Another paper, an American one, the Buffalo News, in reply to those who say that there is as much drinking now as there was in the old days, makes the following comment :-
" If this were so—and it is incredible—a large proportion of the drinkers must be content with moonshine and synthetic beverages—the worst liquors ever devised for man. Only 2 per cent. of the liquor seized by Government agents has been high grade; 98 per cent. has been absolutely poisonous. This is a heavy percentage against the average man that tipples—the man that takes his liquor wherever he can find it. There is threat of death in the cup for him. The moral of all this is that prohibition is making progress, and in the not far distant future it is certain to be a downright fact"
Another piece of evidence is the significant fact that Bishop Manning of New York, who has been an opponent of Prohibi- tion, has frankly recognized the evidence adduced by the facts of the case. He recently told his Annual Convention that he believed from information coming to him from many trust- worthy sources that " Prohibition is already resulting in improved conditions, both morally and practically, in the lives and homes of our people." And he also believed, particularly
from " observance in the army, that Prohibition, properly enforced, will make us a healthier, stronger and better people." The Convention, with only one dissenting voice, ordered the Bishop's remarks to be printed for circulation. I will just add that, so far from Prohibition being hastily enacted, it is literally true, as an American writer has said, that " no ques- tion ever decided upon by the American people was better understood." It is also important to keep in mind the fact that before national Prohibition went into effect thirty-four States, acting separately, adopted Prohibition for themselves. This means that more than three-fifths of the people and four- fifths of the territory were under Prohibition. When the Amendment was submitted to Congress it was passed by a vote of more than two-thirds of both Houses, and was then ratified by fifteen-sixteenths of the States. The two States which failed to ratify have less than one-twentieth of the population and less than one two-hundredths of the territory of the United States.—I am, Sir, &c., W. H. Garrrrrn Taom►s (of Philadelphia), Highclere, Northwood, Middlesex.
Previous page
