As every rational and sensible individual knows and admits, it was big business that put over Prohibition on an unsuspecting public suffering under a war hysteria, and that it was aided and abetted by every branch of the fanatical, corrupt, and reactionary elements in politics, religion, and the legal profession. It was the most vicious and tyrannical piece of legislation enacted anywhere in the world.

Now comes Dr. Henius, after twelve years of hard and strenous mental labor on the subject, after having quoted and repeated all the confusing legalities, illegalities and inconsequentialities, quoting the law, and telling Congress to give us some better near beer.

To every unbiased mind, it is clear that Congress made a fatal error in arbitrarily setting the alcohol limit at 0.5 per cent by volume. It should be brought home forcibly at the next session of Congress, that it is the duty 3of Congress to correct this error by changing the figure 0.5 per cent of alcohol by volume to three per cent by weight, which would be in accordance with scientific opinion. This can be done without violating the Eighteenth Amendment, or interfering with the balance of the Volstead Act.

Dr. Henius informs us that the Danish Temperance Society pledges its members to consume no more than 2.18 per cent alcoholic beverages, and expresses his opinion that if the committee of the American Medical Association, and the American Chemical Society, should propose a standard, it would set the limit of alcohol by weight at three per cent.

Seriously, Dr. Henius, what in the world has that to do with my appetite? Suppose it calls for six per cent. Or what about the opinion of the Sewer Diggers Protective Association? Why should the chemical men be regulated by their ideas of habit and taste as to alcoholic contents of one thing or another?

Does Dr. Henius really think it is fair for him to sit at the round table in Copenhagen with his cronies and consume "schnaps," wine, beer, liquors of all descriptions, and then advise his friends in New York and Chicago to be satisfied with three per cent near beer, so as not to interfere with or violate the 18th. Amendment? Or the Volstead Act? Does Dr. Max really believe it is the function of Government to regulate the habits and appetites of the people rather than provide them with jobs, so that they may produce commodities in the form of food, clothing, shelter, etc., and enjoy the use of them? Or is the whole thing a meaningless attempt to keep it before the public's eye?

I know figures are tiresome reading, but it is well to keep in mind that fifteen hundred citizens and snoopers have been killed in the prohibition warfare and a great many more in gang warfare. Thousands of American citizens have been killed by poisonous liquor. Over a million have been indicted for violating 5the Volstead Act, and hundreds of thousands have been jailed (some for life), and have been made criminals by sumptuary law.

The error is not in the law, but the law itself. It should be repealed and can be repealed, but attempts by brewing interests to pussy-foot the issue by asking for a little better near beer is foolish and dishonest.

Dr. Henius knows that the lawyers in Congress who adopted the Prohibition Law, or rather the majority who enacted it into a law, knew exactly what they were doing, and purposely made errors in order to have it as confusing as their own and other business interests wished it to be.