On Dec. 17, 1917 the House of Representatives embraced national Prohibition when by a vote of 287-10-100 it adopted a Senate resolution submitting the 18th Amendment to the nation. Fifteen years and four days later, on Dec. 21, 1932 the House of Representatives started to withdraw from national Prohibition when by a vote of 23040-165 it passed a bill of its own to legalize 3.2% beer and tax it $5 per bbl.* Not once in the long interim had Wets mustered a winning House majority.
Last week’s milestone was not erected until after the House had shouted itself hoarse in debate. Within six hours, 40 members in turn bounced up to shout, roar, sob, rant, plead or threaten, for & against. In a decade and one-half Prohibition had been argued threadbare. There was nothing new or sensational left to say. Only stunt: appearance before the House of New York’s Sirovich, a physician, with 18 bottles of beer, a pint of Scotch whiskey, a quart of milk and a declaration that the 18 bottles of beer contained the same amount of alcohol as the pint of whiskey, that in physical composition the beer and milk were equally good as food.
Vote statistics: For 3.2% beer—133 Democrats, 96 Republicans; against 3.2% beer—101 Republicans (including 69 “lame ducks”), 64 Democrats (including 12 “lame ducks”).
In the Senate the House beer bill was referred to the Judiciary Committee for a look at its constitutionality, after which it would go to the Finance Committee to have its revenue raising features examined. Loudly fearful that such procedure would cause delay, Connecticut’s Republican Bingham, a “lame duck” who would like to see his name tagged to Wet legislation, attempted to execute a slick trick by moving immediate consideration of a 3.2% beer bill of his own. His motion was defeated 48-10-23 after Democrats hotly accused him of seeking “partisan advantage’ But this vote was only on parliamentary practice, gave no true clue to the Senate’s beer sentiments.
A beer bill quirk: Home brewers without a $1,000 brewer’s license will be liable to a $1,000 fine.
More Must-Reads from TIME
- L.A. Fires Show Reality of 1.5°C of Warming
- Behind the Scenes of The White Lotus Season Three
- How Trump 2.0 Is Already Sowing Confusion
- Bad Bunny On Heartbreak and New Album
- How to Get Better at Doing Things Alone
- We’re Lucky to Have Been Alive in the Age of David Lynch
- The Motivational Trick That Makes You Exercise Harder
- Column: All Those Presidential Pardons Give Mercy a Bad Name
Contact us at letters@time.com