character was the so-called "progressive class system for alcohol." Alcohol can, according to what is said above, be divided into three groups (see Table, p. 143). A Parliamentary Commission exists, with Professor Axel Holst as chairman, and Dr. Johann Scharffenberg as one of the most prominent members. This commission will in the near future finish a larger work, which among other social reforms will discuss the prohibition problem. We expect prohibition to be enforced by law before long, at least for brandy; and personally I entertain the hope that the Commission will go a little further than brandy, and include all alcohol known as Group III. (cf. Table, p. 143). If this should not be the case we shall, according to my opinion, run the risk of getting the brandy in worse forms after the prohibition than the brandy itself—namely, as so-called "port wine," "sherry," "malaga,” etc., which are brandy-mixed drinks. The antiselectoric processes to which alcoholism has to be subjected are increased by our culture and civilization. If we try to find the causes for the degeneration of the Germanic race, to which both the English and the Norwegian nations belong, we find that the modern culture with its panmixia distilled liquors, and venereal diseases is chiefly to blame. But it is not brandy and syphilis alone which ravages the race, it is also the negative selection in our community in general. As long as natural forces were allowed to rule, the chances for producing Viking types were always present, and we have for hundreds of years been proud of the "earl type with the eagle eye." But what is to be the development of our modern community? How does the community - the executive power at present-allow the natural forces to come into play? How does it take care of the generations to come? Does it not everywhere excite a bad influence on the generative evolution? Through its asylums for born feeble-minded, lunatics, epileptics, congenital deaf and dumb, born blind, etc., it forwards thousands of mental and physically defective individuals so far that they are able to reproduce their kind. Through many of its industrial products it disturbs the chemical relation in human organism in such a way that in our country, for instance, we find the peasant youth at the age of eighteen or twenty with artificial teeth. Through its potato-brandy the Germanic race has poisoned itself and its coming generation. By diminishing the infant mortality it increases the rank of degenerates. By war it chooses the best of the nation to fall. Through a refined gynecological practice it increases the number of mothers with narrow pelvis. Through its asylums for drunkards it teaches corpses to walk. All this and much more has the modern culture, the modern community, on its conscience. But can we therefore abolish our culture-abolish our communal life? No, we cannot call back the black death; we can't let the feeble-minded perish; we can't let the infants die like flies; we can't throw the drunkards in the gutter; we can't cease to love our neighbor, even if our neighbor is mentally and physically "unfit"; we can't cease to extend charity to those who were born on the shadow side of life-charity, the finest token of the best of human feelings. There is only one solution to all these contradictions, and the solution can be collected in the one word-race-hygiene-a positive, negative, and prophylactic race-hygiene. And the best prophylactic race-hygiene is to take precautions and restrictions against all chemical race-poisons, especially lead, syphilis, and alcohol. Such protections and restrictions were discussed at the Eugenic Congress in London, 1912. The work will be continued, and the fight of the eugenists no doubt will be directed especially against the higher concentration of alcohol. The strongest blow will be struck against the use of the strongest form the form that destroys life even before that life has commenced. The progressive class system has been established by law, but up to date only for beer. The next step is to bring all alcohol in the country under the same system of legislation. This is now under preparation. Grape-juice and the very lightest and primitive country wine will be classified as Group I. The natural pure but lighter wines will come under decision of Municipal Council as Group II. (Classes II. and III.); and mixed drinks-Port Wine, Sherry, Samos, Malaga, Madeira, Aquavitae, Punch, together with all kinds of brandy, whiskey, vodka, gin, etc.-to be classified as Group III. (Class IV.). The class system allows a taxation which by a slow process moves the consumption from the strongest to the lightest drinks. It permits a simple and cheap control, which is not confined to the factory, but which follows the article, from its origin to its consumption, all over the country. When drinks are marked with their class and placed under supervision of the State the consumers will themselves easily be able to exercise the control. The class system segregates one group of alcohol which ought to be classified as poison and prohibited in the general sale (Group III.). TABLE INDICATING THE CHIEF FEATURES OF THE PROGRESSIVE CLASS SYSTEM OF TAXING ALCOHOL Every bottle sold must have I., II., or III., marked on the bottle. COMMENTS ON THE ABOVE LEGISLATION The progressive taxation of beer as a method of promoting temperance will hardly commend itself to the average American temperance reformer, who obstinately clings to the belief that the use of beer and light wines means the poisoning of the individual and the race. It is worth while to note, however, that ardent temperance advocates in Norway, some of them outspoken prohibitionists, stood behind this legislation. Without their cordial support it could never have been enacted. They at least among their kind took a broad and statesmanlike view of affairs. Another interesting question is how the "trade" in Norway has received the new law. A conclusive answer is found in an article by Mr. K. Oppegaard, who is himself identified with Nor wegian brewing interests and writing in the "Tageszeitung für Brauerei" (Berlin), July 3, 1913, he says: 66 * * * * The new law went into effect on January 1, 1913, and includes not only beer but all fermented alcoholic beverages which are not to be classed as wine. The beer is divided into three classes: "Class I-Beer containing not above 2.25 volume per cent. of alcohol. "Class 2-Beer containing more than 2.25 and up to 3.75 volume per cent. of alcohol. "Class 3-Beer containing more than 3.75 and up to 5.50 volume per cent. of alcohol. "The tax is based upon the litre of beer sold and that consumed in the breweries and is distributed as follows: Class 1, 2 oere; Class 2, 8 oere; Class 3, 17 oere (10 oere equal 2.7 cents). "The breweries are obliged to keep certain books: First, one containing all the data necessary to the proper recording of all the operations of the brewery; Second, a book relating to bottling and filling barrels for transport; Third, a sales book recording all the beer removed from the brewery or drunk on the premises. "The breweries themselves must send exact monthly statements to tax officials of the beer sold or that consumed within the brewery. The brewers who furnish a sufficient guarantee for the payment of the tax are granted credit for a month and a half. There is no daily control exercised in the brewries. One of the permanent functionaries of the establishment, whose name is recorded at the tax office, is obliged by law to keep an accounting of all the beer taken from the brewery. The control office is organized after the Danish system and does not incommode the brewers. All fermenting and lager vats are measured, also vessels for transport. The beer bottles may contain only 35 and 70 centimeters. All the filled barrels and vessels taken away from the brewery must bear the firm mark and a label showing the tax class to which the beer belongs. All filled bottles must have corks or other stoppers stamped with the numbers 1, 2 or 3 and must bear the firm label. "The control exercised is thus very simple and convenient to the brewer. Now and then an official comes to inspect the records in the different books, compares them with the beer in the fermentation and lager rooms with the sales book, etc. Falsifications in order to be successful would therefore have to be carried through all the books and would be noticed by workmen and officials. If the control office has any suspicion it may demand access to the usual business book. The system has been put into operation by the teetotalers and temperance people. It must be said that the brewers have received it well. And. it has at any rate the great advantage of giving public testimony to the small amount of alcohol contained in beer." The standpoint of the Norwegian legislator is that the interests. of temperance can be best promoted in their country by liberalizing the use of the least alcoholic drinks and placing the real injurious ones under ban. This means in effect to classify ordinary beers and light wines as non-intoxicants. When Dr. Mjoen in the foregoing article speaks of beer of Class II. as injurious to the individual but not the race, he clearly does not mean that its moderate use is injurious, otherwise it would certainly have been placed among the articles prohibited. The mon This new Norwegian legislation is the outcome of long and careful study as well as experimentation with various expedients for lessening the consumption of liquor. The country has had a not altogether happy experience with her trial with local prohibition, which has been followed by the usual violations, especially through the sale of a noxious concoction sold as a wine. In the country districts the tourist hotels, of which a large number have sprung up in recent years, have sold liquors of all kinds openly, although located in supposedly prohibition territory. opolization of the sale of whiskey has brought the consumption of this commodity to a low point, where, however, it remains about stationary. Meanwhile the country has not rid itself altogether of alcoholism. After having viewed the whole situation with scientific care the Norwegian reformers have not grasped at absolute prohibition as the one solution. They do not believe the people to be ready for it and dread the evils of non-enforcement. Yet of all peoples the Norwegians should be prepared for absolutist laws. Instead, they aim at the suppression of the sale of distilled spirits and kindred products, expecting that this will be accomplished best by virtually placing a premium on the manufacture and sale of lighter beers, permitting traffic in those not containing more than 51⁄2 per cent of alcohol. Is there not a lesson in this for law makers and reformers in this country? In their wisdom or unwisdom they have never ven |