"THOU SHALT NOT STEAL."

Principle of Compensation Upheld in Switzerland and England

T°

O the average American, familiar with U. S. Supreme Court decisions concerning the compensation question, it may be of interest to learn that, following the precedent established at the time of the introduction of the monopoly, the legislative body of Switzerland, in obedience to the popular mandate, enacted a law granting compensation not only to the owners or lessees of absinthe distilleries and the owners or lessees of wholesale establishments, but also to the owners or lessees of the land upon which the absinthe plant has hitherto been raised, and to the salaried officers and wage-workers employed in the business of making and selling absinthe.

During the time which has elapsed since the adoption of the constitutional amendment the executive officers of the Swiss federation have ascertained by a method of investigation which for thoroughness and fairness cannot be excelled, the number of acres devoted to the culture of the absinthe plant, the number of absinthe distilleries, the number of wholesalers of absinthe, the number of men employed in the two latter branches of the business, together with the amount of capital invested in agriculture, manufacture and commerce (so far as the prohibited article is concerned), and the amount of profit annually derived from each.

Upon the basis of these exhibits compensation was awarded in each case. The compensation averages four times the amount of the yearly profit in each case, labor excepted, it being assumed, with the concurrence of the parties injured, that the agricultural lands and the buildings and the business devoted, respectively, to the raising of the raw material and the manufacture and sale of absinthe can readily be used for other profitable purposes. Labor is compensated in an equally equitable manner. The Swiss people and government have caused a thorough; scientific investigation of the nature of all fermented and distilled liquors used in their country. They have found that some are so perfectly wholesome and absolutely harmless that in the interest of the common weal they deserve encouragment; that others, apt to lead to excesses, should be reasonably restricted. In only one case absinthe-the

public welfare seemed to demand a drastic measure, and in applying this in the form of prohibition the people decided, by means of the referendum, that fairness and equity imperatively demanded the indemnification of the parties who must bear the losses growing out of the law.

THE AMERICAN METHOD

differs from the Swiss in some essential particulars. Without any scientific evidence-in fact, in spite of convincing contrary proof— the legislature of Kansas, Maine or Iowa decides that all beverages containing alcohol, including the mildest wine, but always (for the sake of the farmer's vote) excluding cider with its nine to ten per cent. of alcohol, constitute a menace to the public weal and must therefore, being public nuisances, be placed under the ban of prohibition without any compensation to those persons, who under the explicit terms of local excise laws and the Federal revenue acts, have invested all their capital in a business now outlawed, but formerly encouraged by legislative enactments. The U. S. Supreme Court decides that in the exercise of its police power any State may destroy any business deemed dangerous to the public weal without compensating the parties injured thereby.

The difference between the American and British attitude toward this question of compensating persons engaged in the liquor traffic, in the event of the legal extinction of their business, is marked and extraordinary. We are often accused of playing the "sedulous ape" to the Englishman in matters of fashion, etc., and it seems that we might profitably take an occasional lesson from him in the province of government. Certainly the British position on this question of compensation is in accord with simple justice and reflects credit on the national sense of honor and equity.

Look at the contrast. In this country immense property interests are wiped out by prohibitory laws and not a dollar allowed for compensation, the highest Court in the land having affirmed the legality and justice of such virtual confiscation. In England, on the contrary, public sentiment favors the principle of compensation -the measure of such compensation was about the only question at issue regarding the Licensing Bill not long ago rejected by the Lords, both parties being agreed as to the principle of indemnification.

When the bill was introduced, Chancellor Asquith called attention to the fact that license was extinguished without compen

sation in the United States and in some of the British Colonies, and that legally such an enactment would not be wrong. But he added, "We think, and rightly in my opinion, that not only policy but equity demands a fair recognition of the expectations upon which this industry has so long been conducted."

It may be needful to point out that nothing like the American idea or system of prohibition prevails in England. The bill rejected by the Lords simply gave to each community the right to say that there should be no increase in the number of licenses and it provided for a gradual reduction of the number of public houses, allowing a certain compensation to the holders of extinguished licenses.

Moderate as this proposal was, being strictly in the line of regulation, it failed to find favor with the English people whose reverence for property and vested rights has often figured in the making of history. It is conceded that the Peers would not have dared to reject the bill had they not felt that the overwhelming mass of public sentiment was behind them.

But what would the British public think of such wholesale measures of spoliation and confiscation as are calmly proposed and as calmly executed in our liberty-loving country? For in England the liquor business is not regarded as outlawed, nor as the legitimate prey of venal agitators, and no such decision as that of our Supreme Court mentioned above, has ever emanated from the Woolsack. English Peers are heavily interested in brewing, as well as many clergymen of the Established Church, and nobody has to apologize for his connection with a trade which is recognized as a great source of the National wealth.

IN MEMORIAM

ADOLPHUS BUSCH.

Adolphus Busch, President of the Anheuser-Busch Brewing Association, of St. Louis, died recently in Langenschwalbach, Prussia, at the age of seventy-six. Word of his death reached St. Louis while the 100th anniversary of German independence was being celebrated in that city. Mr. Busch had been made honorary President of the German-American centennial celebration, and a cablegram extending "fraternal greetings" had been sent to him shortly before his death. Mr. Busch was one of the foremost German-Americans of the country. His public benefactions were many, including one gift of $350,000 toward the establishment of a Germanic Museum at Harvard.

At the time of the San Francisco earthquake and fire he contributed $100,000 to the relief fund. He also contributed heavily to the relief of the Galveston flood sufferers, and $25,000 to the relief of the Ohio valley flood sufferers, last spring.

Mr. Busch was born July 10, 1837, at Mayence-on-the-Rhine, Germany. He was the son of Ulrich and Barbara Busch and a descendant of an old German family. He was educated at the Gymnasium at Mayence, the Academy at Darmstadt, and the High School at Brussels. At the age of twenty he moved to this country and settled in St. Louis. He became clerk on a Mississippi River steamer, and held clerkships in various St. Louis commercial houses until 1859, when he established himself in the general commission and malting business.

In 1862 he married Miss Lily Anheuser, daughter of the late Eberhard Anheuser, who was then interested in the beer-brewing plant known as the Bavarian Brewery. Mr. Busch acquired a controlling interest in the business, and it was later incorporated with Anheuser as President and Busch as Secretary. Following the death of Mr. Anheuser in 1880, the corporation was changed to the Anheuser-Busch Brewing Association with Mr. Busch President.

Mr. Busch was the inventor of a process of bottling beer that enabled it to withstand the temperature of all climates. This invention brought about a revolution in the industry, and the

plant in St. Louis became one of the largest in the world. In 1911 he celebrated his golden wedding anniversary. Among those who sent gifts were Willianm H. Taft, then President, Col. Roosevelt, and the German Emperor.

The following eloquent and notable tribute appeared in the St. Louis Mirror:

"Simple truth is enough to tell the story of Adolphus Busch whose body is now homeward bound for burial here from his villa on the Rhine. No matter how many millions the newspapers say he was 'worth,' he was worth more than all his millions. He was bigger than his fortune. St. Louis loved him more for what he was than for what he had.

"Mr. Busch's business success was genius. He could toil terribly, and did, but he had imagination that reacted against, yet utilized, the despotism of fact. He saw into the future and built for it. He had a purpose, too, beyond gain. He believed in promoting sobriety by supplanting the heavier, harder liquors with a lighter, milder beverage, as did Thomas Jefferson before him, and he found the way to do this. Moreover, when he found how to bottle beer that would keep in any climate he found the way to diminish the evil of the saloon, for the bottled beer went finally into the home and thus promoted temperance by leading away from temptation to excess. The imagination and the idea made Mr. Busch a colossally successful manufacturer known the wide world around.

"But the man was more than the merchant. He was never eclipsed by his business. The machine never got hold of his heart and soul. He was a spacious, open-minded, warm-hearted, cheerful, helpful human being. He liked the fun of doing big things, but he had equal pleasure in doing the little things that soften and sweeten the asperities of life. He took to himself in generous friendship all kinds of men,—he was the friend of an Emperor and of the humblest worker on his vast pay-roll-and though living always lordly, expansively, with a dash of personal pose and a pleasure in the panache, he was a thorough democrat.

"Mr. Busch was good to everybody out of a natural goodness and bigness of heart. He was no dickerer or chafferer in business. He did things by a sort of splendid intuition-investing a million or helping a charity. He gave of his great wealth in thousands of ways, and the spirit of the gift was ever worth more than its amount.