pleted its labors, is an example. This body spent several years in an investigation of the subject in all aspects at home and abroad, and when it had assembled and assimilated the great body of facts thus gathered, it was prepared to make recommendations suited to the temper and character of the nation..

It is significant that in no case has recent action of the European nations upon this subject taken the form of prohibition. Even Russia has not adopted prohibition, for though placing the heavy spirituous liquors under the ban, she has expressly exempted beverages containing not more than 12 per cent of alcohol, which would include all beers and the natural unfortified wines. The trend in all the other European governments is the same. France, having abolished absinthe and sharply restricted the use of spirits, is reported to be about to adopt even more stringent measures regarding the latter, though permitting the use of beer and wine. Great Britain is reported to be about to adopt a similar course and may possibly nationalize the whole traffic. In Germany and AustriaHungary the severe restrictions affect distilled spirits. Italy has adopted no prohibitive measures against wines. The Scandinavian countries surround the sale of distilled liquors with all sorts of restrictions and subject them to heavy taxation, but encourage the use of light wines and malt beverages by liberal regulations and light taxation. The lighter grade of beer is in some cases untaxed and permitted to be sold without license.

Indeed the very terminology is different in Europe. The fanatical prohibitionist in the United States makes no distinction between the lightest form of beer and the heaviest form of distilled spirits. To him they are all equally "alcoholic" beverages whose elimination he demands. In Europe the term "alcoholic" is commonly employed to denote only the heavy beverages, and the League Against Alcohol of France, the foremost organization of its kind in that country, expressly recommends the encouragement of the use of wines and beer as a means of combatting the use of liquors. France officially classes wine, beer, cider and perry as "hygienic drinks," while the nations at war serve the lighter alcoholic beverages in the form of rations to their fighting men.

It is significant, also, that the European nations have universally

adopted the principle of compensation for losses sustained by individuals through the operation of regulations restrictive of the liquor traffic. Not even in the stress of the present death struggle has this principle been violated or even slighted. To the distiller whose plant is taken over for munition purposes, to the public house owner whose establishment lies within a proscribed area, to every one whose business is for any cause destroyed by the necessities of war, the government makes compensation.

The measures adopted by European governments, based, as indicated, upon the facts developed by painstaking and impartial investigation, have had most gratifying results. Sweden, once known as the "most drunken country in Europe," has made great strides in sobriety under wise legislation. Norway has become one of the most temperate of nations. Recent regulations in France give promise of working a reformation among the inhabitants, particularly of the northern section, where the practice of household distillation had assumed enormous proportions and been productive of great evils. In truth, it can be laid down as a general proposition, that Europe has found a way to temperance without confiscation of property, or destruction of important interests, without interference with popular tastes and customs, and without arousing the intense antagonisms and bitterness that invariably attend the radical courses pursued in some portions of the United States.

If an attempt be made to discover the reason for the faulty methods employed in this country and the practical failure to accomplish permanent and positive improvement, the path leads inevitably to the door of the chief organization espousing the cause of prohibition, which for a score of years has conducted an active warfare throughout the country. The rise of the Anti-Saloon League of America and its growth in power constitute one of the phenomena of the Republic's history. Long before its birth there had been a prohibition party which had never been able to prove itself an important political factor and which to-day commands but few followers. The Anti-Saloon League did not immediately proclaim itself as favoring prohibition and did not assume the form and character of a political party. It cut party lines, in fact, and gained its first impetus by emphasizing the many offensive features and many ob

vious deficiencies of the American Saloon. It gained recruits by raising side issues and avoiding broad principles. It succeeded in gathering under its standards practically all of the old-fashioned organizations that were distinguished by the term "temperance" and it built up throughout the country compact groups of adherents, smaller or greater, as the case might be, to which its admonitions were as law. It found a welcome in the pulpits of several large religious bodies, and it did not hesitate to reach into the collection boxes of churches for the material means to support its propaganda. It was ideally constituted for prompt and efficient action, for it was ruled by a small coterie which avowed responsibility to nobody and which issued no reports. The oligarchy exists now and it would be a difficult, if not impossible, task to determine the wielders of power in the Anti-Saloon League, and the names of those directing its course.

It has been said that the League, at the outset, did not espouse prohibition. It did battle for local option and was warm in its professions of belief in the justice and efficacy of home rule. But its love for home rule invariably waned when an opportunity arose under county option to coerce by the power of larger units those municipalities which did not adopt its ideas. And when a sufficient number of "dry" counties had been secured, it was ready to throw off all disguise and declare for State prohibition. The suspicion with which local option has been regarded by many of those engaged in the manufacture and sale of alcoholic beverages, is readily explicable in view of these circumstances.

The Anti-Saloon League is now demanding national prohibition and is employing familiar tactics to force the proposed constitutional amendment through Congress. If it should ever be able to bring about national prohibition, the question as to its future course of action would at once become extremely important. The experience of the past warrants the prediction that, in such an event, the AntiSaloon League would not be content to sink into passivity. In every State where it has brought about prohibition, the League has been stirred to greater activity and to bolder grasping for power. The recent history of Virginia may furnish an example. A comparatively mild prohibitory measure having been approved by the people at the polls, the Anti-Saloon League drove through the

Legislature a statute far more drastic in its provisions, calling for costly and elaborate machinery of enforcement. The State Superintendent of the League was actually selected as Commissioner of Prohibition with power to appoint an army of deputies and to supersede the constituted attorneys of the commonwealth in legal cases in which his department might be concerned. A ruling by this official, interpretative of some regulation, was recently described in the public press with no thought of irony as a "concession to the people."

This is not an isolated instance of usurpation of governmental authority. In another State the Anti-Saloon League leader is disclosed as organizing crowds to invade court rooms and brow-beat judges and juries in liquor cases; in still another, the attorney of the organization demands and receives from a judge part of the evidence gathered in similar cases; in all, the power of an irresponsible group over public affairs and public officials is manifested at every turn. When the magnitude of the police problem that would be involved in national prohibition is considered-to say nothing of any of the other great problems that would be inseparable from such a policy-it is not difficult to imagine the part the Anti-Saloon League of America would seek to assume in national affairs.

In the making up of such a volume as the Year Book the problem is invariably one of selection, for a wealth of material is at hand. In the current volume, the annual address of the President of the United States Brewers' Association will be found of interest as stating the policies and principles of the brewing industry, and the important domestic events of the year in the way of elections, new legislation and court decisions, will be found in the report of the Vigilance Committee. A carefully prepared article gives valuable information concerning the situation in Canada and contrasts. the Dominion brand of prohibition with that in the United States. Governmental action concerning liquor by the warring European countries is summarized and a paper originally published in the Mexican Review shows how the reform element in that country, after testing prohibition, felt compelled to abandon it. Some of the many misstatements which are put forward by the Anti-Saloon League and prohibition orators and writers are exposed in a series of ar

ticles. In particular, excerpts from the writings of Arne Fischer, a well-known Danish mathematician, reveal the misuse of statistics and the fallacy of arguments based thereupon by certain individuals who have attempted to treat the subject from the standpoint of science. An elaborate study of the workings of local option in the United States, and an exposition of the evils attributable to the operations of prohibition in Mississippi, will prove profitable reading. The habit of thought and action of a prohibition community is strikingly revealed in the philosophic articles by Albert J. Nock, republished from the North American Review. A chapter from Bolton Hall's recently published book on "Thrift" refutes a widely promulgated and oft-reiterated charge that liquor is responsible for the greater part of social ills and excerpts from the latest edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica show the attitude of the greatest authority in the world towards several phases of the question. Some important statistical tables will be found among other features of the Year Book.

The Year Book of the United States Brewers' Association is designed primarily for the use and benefit of students of the drink question. None of the articles therein is under copyright-unless expressly stated-and full use may be made of all the matter found within its covers.

HUGH F. Fox,

Secretary.