Are the attacks upon the distillers merely a ruse to conceal the
fact that officers, directors and thousands of stockholders of the
largest brewing companies in all parts of the country are either
wholesale or retail whiskey dealers, or saloon keepers, or both?

If the brewers are sincere in their promise to divorce beer from
whiskey, why have they not closed their own whiskey stores?

Why have they not placed a ban upon the sale of whiskey in all the
saloons which they own and operate themselves?

Why have they not forbidden the sale of whiskey in all saloons?
What is there to prevent it?

Is it not a fact that, with few exceptions, the so-called owners
of saloons, not operated by brewers themselves, are merely slaves
of the brewers, the latter owning either the property or the lease,
the license and a chattel mortgage upon the fixtures in the place?

The truth is that a saloon keeper can not exist if his business
should be restricted to the sale of beer--and the closing of a
saloon means a loss to the brewer.

I quote here again from an editorial written by Mr. J. Frank Hanly,
former Governor of Indiana, which appeared in the National Enquirer
(Indianapolis), of which he is the editor, as follows:

"When the writer of this editorial was a candidate for the nomination
for Governor of the State of Indiana it was not the distilling