THE UNIVERSITY DAILY
A LITTLE COOLER
KANSAN
The University of Kansas
Vol.89, No.57
Tuesday, November 14, 1978
Metric change going slowly See story page four
Lawrence, Kansas
2 women hurt by shotgun fire in store holdup
By DEB RIECHMANN
CAROL BENTZWERDING
Staff Reporters
Two Lawrence women were slightly injured by riccotherapy shotgun pellets when two men robbed a grocery store yesterday afternoon at #64 New Hampshire St.
The two women, Sherri Stanton, 21, 745 Grant St., and Delores Statner, 46, 727 Walnut St., received leg wounds when one of them fell into the tile floor of the Wav-1A food store.
Terry Garman,店 manager, said, "The one guy had taken off and the other guy was backing out. He yelled something and then fired his gun. We found some shot in the animal crackers and some in the ceiling."
The two men, who police have not identified, were seen in a late model Vega bearing Missouri license plates parked in front of the hotel about one half hour before the robbery.
ACCORDING TO Ll. Kenneth Harmon, police detective, the car was found abandoned at the Santa Fe Railway Co., 413 E. Ile, near Fort Collins in several vehicles for a second vehicle.
Staff photo by RANDY OLSON
Garman said he thought one of the robbers carried a 38-caliber "Saturday night special." Garman described the robber as a male, about 5 feet 8 inches tall, weighing
Garman said he had seen the other robber before, shopping in the store. He described him as a 3-foot-9-inch male, who weighed six pounds and carried a awed-off shotgun.
A lone member of Greene County Sport Parachute Center in Wellsville hangs under ominous clouds on his last jump of the day.
"I thought it was a toy gun—some sort of joke—when I first saw it," Garman said. "It 'it didn't take long, though, to realize that it wasn't a joke."
"I SAW THIS fellow standing by the ice machine. He was pointing his gun and yelling "open up the cash drawers and take out all of them," he said, "we stay back and I said get the money out."
The robbers fled with a grocery sack stuffed with an undetermined amount of money from three cash registers. Police are examining the cash drawers for the robber's
Stanton was not available for comment last night, but Statler said she was still available.
"When you walk into the store and get shot-I'm still a little shaken and I hurt." Statter said. "I don't think I'll shop there or at least I'll be taking someone with me."
The robbery occurred at about 3:15 p.m., which Garman said was one of the store's busiest times. After the robbery, an ambulance arrived to take the two women to Lawrence Memorial Hospital, where they were transported to special wounds to their legs and then released.
Liquor act declared unconstitutional
Hanging low
By TIM SHEEHY
Staff Reporter
The state's new liquor-in-restaurants bill, passed by the 1978 Kansas Legislature and approved by 15 counties in the general election last week, was declared unconstitutional yesterday by the Kansas Supreme Court.
In a 4-3 decision, the state's high court said the law was in violation of Article 15 section 10 of the Kansas State Constitution.
In a memorandum decision, written by Chief Justice Alfred Schroeder, the court granted a petition prohibiting the state's Alcoholic Beverage Control division from issuing licenses to restaurants.
measure out of 45 counties that had it on the general election ballot.
JES SANTAURALIA, owner of the Eldridge House Dining Room and Club, Seventh and Massachusetts streets, and leader of the petition drive to get the ballots on the ballot, was disappointed in the court's decision.
Douglas County was one of 15 counties to pass the
"After all of this work, I am extremely disappointed," SantaUularia said yesterday. "I think the next step would be a class action suit by the people of the state of Kansas against the Supreme Court."
The decision handed down by the court gave only a brief explanation of the court's reasoning, but a more
detailed decision is expected to be issued within the next two weeks.
AFTER HEARING initial arguments in the case Oct. 27, the Supreme Court promised to rule on the issue before Dec. 1, but its decision yesterday came unexpectedly.
State Sen. Norman Gaur, R-Westwood, who was in passing in the bill said, the court's decision
Gaar said he thought the court decided to rule early so that agencies involved in the implementation of the act would not start paperwork involved with the bill, only to have the law overruled later.
GAAR, WHO is Senate majority leader, said he hoped the court would specify what aspect of the bill it found should be amended.
Gaur said he doubted that yesterday's decision would prompt legislators to attempt to remove the con-
clavity of the law.
The Rev. Richard Taylor, president of the Kansas United Dry Fees League, said he was pleased by the success of the campaign.
"I expected this all along," Taylor said. "However, I cannot believe three of the laws ruled for it. The people of Kansas have always known that the ban on the onion was illegal, and that cannot be served to anyone walking into a restaurant."
Legal services survey shows interest for plan
Rv MARY ERNST
Staff Reporter
More than three-fourths of KU students would be likely to use an attorney paid for by student fees, according to the federal services survey released recently.
The survey, conducted through phone interviews with 231 randomly selected KU students, was designed nearly two years later to evaluate the legal Services Governing Boards.
Board members said the purpose of the survey was to find out what kind of legal aid they would be willing to pay and whether they would use a lawyer paid for by student fees if one were
The board had planned to use the results of the poll when it designed a legal services proposal to submit to Mike Harmer, student body president.
BUT MARGARET Berlin, chairman of the Student Senate Communications Committee, said problems in running the college were due to the release of the report several weeks.
The survey showed that 48.5 percent of all students polled said they would "very" want to help children with fees if they needed legal assistance, and another 27.3 percent said they would not.
Twenty-four percent of the students said it would be unlikely that they would contact an attorney hired by student fees if they needed legal assistance.
Craig Helser, a member of the governing board, said yesterday that he thought the survey produced expected results.
THE BOARD also had wanted to find out whether KU students actually have had a need for legal education in the past and that students usually went to find legal aid.
"The survey is just another indication that we do need a legal services program here." Helser said.
Bob Rocha, a member of the governing board, had said he thought the results of the survey would show that a legal action against him would take business www.front.local attorneys.
The survey showed that 22.9 percent, or $3 of the 231 students polled, had needed some legal advice in the past and the 231 had seen a lawyer for that advice.
Of those 31 students who said they had seen a lawyer, five had seen a lawyer in Lawrence, seven had seen a private lawyer outside of Lawrence. 10 had gone to the Legal Aid Society and nine did not respond to the question.
HOWEVER, 30 students said they had not seen a lawyer for past legal problems. Of those 30, 15 said they had settled the problem with a lawyer, 14 said the cost had been too great and five said they did not know a lawyer.
Of the students who were polled, 29 percent said they did not know how many times they were likely to use an attorney's service.
However, 28.1 percent said they thought they would use the legal services program once a year, 6.5 percent said they would probably use the service twice a year and 11.3 percent said they would probably help someone's lawyer help more than two times a year.
The survey shows that legal services won't hurt local attorneys because the students who are going to use the legal services program are very likely to be the ones who wouldn't go to local attorneys because it was too expensive.
Of those polled, 23.4 percent were freshmen, 23.9 percent, sophomores; 25.5 percent, juniors; 18.6 percent, seniors; 0.4 percent, 1fourth-year seniors; 10 percent, graduate students; and 1.3 percent, special students.
However, 29 percent of the 231 students said they probably would not use the attorney's service at all during a year.
Moonshine flows, but not freely
By HENRY LOCKARD
Staff Reporter
The paths leading to moonshiners' stills are quickly vanishing in the grasses. The last time a still was baked in the oven was about 50 years ago. A forcement officer for the Kansas Alcoholic Beverage Control, said recently that he didn't remember when or where it was.
Strukel said he had been associated with the ABC for the last 12 years and he didn't think anyone in Kansas was
"Now, I'm not going to be so naive as to say that no one has a still in his home for his private use, but as far as anybody with a big operation, I don't think that's going on," be said.
Moonshining was biggest in Kansas during the Prohibition era of the 1920s and 1930s. Several older men in Douglas and surrounding counties remember what those days were like.
One alleged moonshiner said any publication that thought it could write about moonshiners was "crazy", and then published it. The author of *The Moonshiners*
SOME OF those men still know where moonshine can be bought. However, strangers have a difficult time getting it.
One man who allegedly knew where to go to get it burned out at the start, "Grownpa told me never to on nobody. If I didn't," she replied.
"That's why I'm dumb. I don't know nothing."
"Hell, this man used to make it down the road here. Well, the law found him and now he'd sin' in a striped suit on his back."
But those men both admitted, as did others, that moonshine still could be purchased.
'Strukel explained that moonshining was legal because whisky could be manufactured only under the supervision of the federal government. He cited sanitation reasons as being the most obvious concern of the government.
STRUKEL KMOAIN moonshining also because of tax fraud. Said he distilled spirits, or proof whiskey, carried a federal tax of $10.50 a gallon and a state tax of $27.50. He distilled an 4 percent enforcement tax when it was sold in a store.
So moonshiner cheat the government out of at least $13 whenever a gallon of their product is sold.
However, every man contacted about past and present moonshining laid out at the outton that it still went on because, they said, inflation has boosted the cost of fuel a gallon to a where rewarding profit no longer be made.
But a comparison of the cost of materials for 10 gallons of moonshine to the cost of 10 gallons of grain alcohol in a liquor store suggested that moonshining still could be profitable.
Recipes for moonshine that were offered by four men who had been exposed to the production of moonshine varied in the amount of yeast required and in how long the mash should be left to "work" before distillation. How much yeast to use ranged from one pound to three pounds and the mash should "work" range from eight days to 10 days.
FOR A 10 gallon run, the cost by ingredient is as follows:
50 calories of water, insignificant;
100 pounds of sugar, $21.30
2 pounds of yeast, $7.70
1 bushel of corn (although any grain or fruit could be used): $2.16.
That means that 10 gallons of moonshine could be produced for as little as $13,—16 just more than $5 a gallon.
In a liquor store, grain alcohol, the comparable liquor that we widely used, would cost $2.49 for a fifteen gallon, or
John C., a local man who used to boote during Prohibition, calculated that a still could be built in 1837.
He said he had built several stills and derived the $10 figure by comparing what a new Ford cost in 1925 and what it would cost in 2023.
"IF YOU FIGURE that in 1925 I could build a still for $1 for a gallon, and that I bought a new Ford for $425, then by figuring that a new Ford costs about $5,000 today, well, you see... what's that at 10 times the amount?"
"So I'd say you could build a still now for $10 a gallon, or as setting all the materials for it, any way," he said.
John C. said he had not drunk any moonshine for more than 30 years, but he thought he wouldn't have any trouble getting some from near his hometown in southeast Kansas if he asked around.
Similarly, an old man in the northeast part of the state he drank a severe moonstone "not too long ago, boy," and "they were still in the mountains."
Assuming that moonshine still was being made and that its cost was reasonable, the problem became getting some
The most recent arrest of a masonner who also was his own bootleger, was Sept. 8, when a 45-year-old Pencil Bluff, Ark, man was arrested for the sale of 37.2 gallons of moonshine to undercover FB agents.
THE ARREST took place in Kansas City, Mia., and Charles Harvey, regional director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, said the man arrested was looking for a new market.
However, that arrest didn't seem to frighten local
Harvey said the agents bought the man's moonshine for $15 a gallon and later, when they wrecked his still, discovered it had a 500-gallon capacity, which should have been capable of a 50-gallon run.
The donors presented a stark contrast in occupation and in the method of transferring the moonshine.
moonshiners, because two men consented to donate a pint each for laboratory analysis.
One pint was delivered in a $1,000 luxury car at a $5 apa-
ple brunch where a prominent drummer was drumming up the
entertainment.
The other sample was not delivered at all. Instead, it was picked up from a place its donor had promised to have it.
Of the two samples, both had been tinted brown and burned but the other did not. However, both samples had the same color.
THE PURPOSE of the brown tint was for disguise. Both samples were bottled in brand-name liquid bottles in case a chemical spill occurred.
The politician said his sample was tinted because it had been kept in a charcoal barrel with oak chips. The man who supplied the sample, which was the one that burned, he sutected the politician had colorized it with burnt sugar.
He smelt it and drank it and then said, "That's moonshine. There ain't no question about that, kiddo."
When he learned that the stuff wouldn't burn, he said,
"That stuff been watered down. Hell, we always test ours
with a match. If it don't burn, we won't eat it. The stuff you got's been cut."
"If you have the good stuff and light a match to it, it'll just make the crettiest little blue fire you ever saw."
Later, when he donated some of his own, although it, too,
was colored, it did make a pretty little blue flame and
had a wavy edge.
AND BOTH samples felt oilier on the lips than did relicated liquor, a trait one referred to as distinct. Another characteristic both donors claimed was that their samples would "take the top of your head off."
But regarding the laboratory analysis, the important thing to know was whether the moonshine was safe for use.
unfortunately, a thorough analysis would have cost between $200 and $1,000 at a laboratory. The Food and Drug Administration, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and the State Alcoholic Beverage Control would have done a simpler analysis for another type of compensation—names of moonshiners and locations of stills.
Therefore, the only analysis that was simple to get was the percent of alcohol each sample contained. The result was that the politician's sample was 75 proof, or 37.5 per cent of alcohol. The politician's sample was exactly 100 proof, or 50 percent alcohol by volume.
As expected, moonshiner's opinions about drinking moonshine conflict with the law's opinions.
See MOONSHINE back page