POISON LIQUOR

Evening Star, Issue 20057, 24 December 1928, Page 6

POISON LIQUOR

HEW YORK EPIDEMIC The death of thirty-four persons from wood-alcohol or the effects of poison liquor in New York City alone—all within four .days—has served to hrww;. about a Federal grand jury investigation, raids on scores of speak-easies in the poorer quarters of the citj’. numerous arrests, charges of homicide against the purveyors of “ smoke ” and ’■ white mule,” statements that Prohibition is a failure; that the Government is to blame for poisoning industrial alcohol pand- finally, astounding as it may seem to the man in the street, that. Prohibition enforcement officials cannot make arrests in the circumstances for the simple reason that the Prohibition laws do not make the selling of wood alcohol a crime. The death list from poisoned liquor, according to New York newspapers, was greater during the four days beginning with October 13 than in any previous full year since 1920. As a direct result of the recent death'toll (says the New York ‘.Evening Post’) “a thousand detectives have been withdrawn from other duties and set to gathering evidence against every known speak-easy in the city. And a recent survey by this newspaper showed that there are some 15,000 of them.” But Federal and State authorities are divided as to the responsibility for preventing the sale of wood alcohol or any beverage containing this poison for drinking purposes. Prohibition enforcement officials maintain that the sale does not violate any Federal law, but the Acting District Attorney in New York declares that offenders should be prosecuted by Federal authorities. ■ under the Volstead Law. which bans the sale of beverages containing more than one-half of 1 per cent, alcohol. Thus, points out the Detroit ‘ Free Press ’ ;

“A question of jurisdiction is raised which could not have been raised if New York had not repealed its Prohibition enforcement law, since under that law the State could have prosecuted, whether the poisonous liquor was technically a poison or a beverage. As it is, a situation exists in which it is not impossible that the men responsible for these deaths wi'l escape prosecution altogether.” In the opinion of the Federal grand jury, which has been investigating the recent wave of poison-liquor deaths: —

“ Since wood-alcohol is not a beverage, but a recognised poison (analogous to prussic acid or iodine) and its use and sale are not regulated by any of the Federal laws, we respectfuly report that in those particular instances the subject matter is for the consideration of the State authorities rather than the Federal authorities. The State laws regulate the sale of poisons, and provide for punishment for their improper use and sale.” With,- this to guide him, Mayor Walker, of New York, has announced that if any of the beverages seized in the speak-ensies from which the thirtyfour victims are said to have made purchases are found to be poisoned, the owners will, be prosecuted for murder. Meanwhile, Congressman Black (Dem., N.Y.) declares that he will make a vigorous fight in Congress at the coming session “to stop using deadly poisons as denatnrants for industrial alcohol.” According to Mr Black: — “ There were 11,700 deaths from alcohol poisoning in the United States last year. The use of 60,000,000 gal of industrial alcohol is annually authorised, and the Prohibition officials at Washington know that of this amount 6,000,000 gal find their way into bootleg liquor. Yet the Government poisons the entire 60,000.000ga1, knowing that at least one-tenth of this amount will be drunk by American citizens.”

“ If there is anything more disgraceful than enforcing a law' bv means of poisonous substance,” the New' Haven ‘ Journal-Courier ” does not know what it can be.” To this paper:— “There is a right way and a vile way of enforcing a law. The Government’s way of enforcing the Volstead Law' is the vile w'ay. It is taken for granted that Prohibition will stimulate the manufacture of illegal liquor, just as other forms of Prohibition lead to bootlegging. The lawmaker who does not understand is not fit to sit in the halls of legislation. To meet the frailties of human nature by processes that do not prevail in the enforcement of anv other law', save that of capital punishment, is a. perversion of sound government and public morals. “It is one thing to prohibit the use of grain alcohol in the manufacture of intoxicating liquor, but it is an altogether different thing to poison it in order to make the law effective. It would he just as consistent to poison the actors who have been playing in New York in a vilely suggestive play.” The present Prohibition situation, rather than the diversion of industrial alcohol from legitimate channels into the hands of bootleggers, says a spokesman for the alcohol manufacturers, is responsible for New' York’s poison liquor epidemic. This authority, Dr Marks, head' of the Industrial Alcohol Institute, of New' York City, denies that 10 per cent, of the industrial alcohol output is diverted to- bootleggers, and maintains that—

“The blame for the gr at ir’mber of deaths caused by the drinking of non-beverage alcohol in this city cannot be laid at the door of the manufacturers of industrial alcohol. General ignorance, which leads these unfortunate men and women to buy deadly poison, which is a few' cents cheaper than bootleg whisky, is the greatest factor. It is entirely up to the police power of the city, State, and nation to prevent such slaughter.” “The deliberate distnmuion of poison liquor as a beverage,” believes the New York ‘Herald-Tribune,’ “is murder, and should be dealt witn as such, thus furnishes a lesson to all outlaws unscrupulous enough to introduce wood alcohol into bootleg channels,” Put, this paper continues; “ Their punishment will hardly stive the social problem which this epidemic illuminates in such startling relief. Given the conditions that have lollowed in the wake of Prohibition and the same ghastly drama will be cnaded again as it has been in The past. And this despite a more vigorous er.lncement of the Prohibition law's, if it comes, or even because of it. In fact, there is good reason for behoving that a sudden stiffening of police enforcement was the underlying cause of the present tragedy. In the districts in which the police raids have occurred it is estimated that at least a thousand speak-easies do a thriving business... A great many of these, it is reported, are mere holes in the wall ••'bic.i have sprung up virtually overnight as a result of the pressure which the police of late have put on the more permanent dives.

“In nine years of trial Prohibition has resulted in an increase of deaths from alcoholism in this' city from eighty-seven in 1918, the last year of' license, to 518 for the first seven months of this year. ; To this latter figure now add the number ; recorded above ’Could any belter argument be advanced for its abandonment in favour of a system of strict Governmental regulation which would bring the liquor traffic into the open and hold those engaged in it to strict accountability ?”

On the other hand, Orville S. Poland, Anti-Saloon League official in New York, considers the city’s poison liquor fatalities “ a natural consequence to the kind of Prohibition enforcement ire have been getting in New York since Governor Smith signed the repeal of the Mullan-Gage Jaw. The result was to take the State officers off the job of enforcement.” The Prohibition Educational League of New York City also agrees that “ the great need at the present time is a State Jaw against the speak-easy and the bootlegger.” ,In the ‘American issue,’ of Westerville, Ohio, the Prohibitionist’s attitude is set forth as follows; “ The deaths of thirty-four persons in New York from drinking bootleg liquor are regrettable—a needless waste of human life. “Who is to blame for these .deaths? Not the Prohibition law; it,.stands between these victims and the stuff which would kill them. Not the Government, which denatures alcohol for industrial purposes in order to render.it unfit to drink, labels it, and warns against using it for beverage purposes. No: lawlessness is at the root of these tragedies; lawlessness of derelict public officials who conspire with bootleggers, who/ in turn conspire with their patrons; lawlessness of those who buy this contraband liquor—and thereby become equally guilty with those who sell it. “ Whp is to blame? Wet newspapers which ridicule the dry law and condone dry-law violations, thereby encouraging lawlessness; and prominent and influential men and women who, by voice and pen, declare that the law cannot be enforced.”