Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

CLEVELAND NEWSPAPER DIGEST JAN. 1 TO DEC. 31, 1874

Abstracts 160 - 164

ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS (Cont'd)

160 L Sept. 2:7/3 The following liquor dealers appeared in court yesterday and plead guilty to the indictment of having sold intoxicating drink in violation of the law. Each was fined twenty dollars and costs: Philip Maguire, George Muller, Joseph Murch, Nelson Farr, Fred Nolls, Jacob Kreager, H. Fifield, William Ryan and T. Malley.

161 L Sept. 4:7/1

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

(2)

E. M. Cockley, Wesley Sargeant, E. M. Witter, John Ellsler, John Joshua, Henry Lederer, and Edward Balmer appeared in common pleas court yesterday and plead guilty to the indictment of selling liquor contrary to law. Cockley and Sargeant were fined $20 and costs, jointly as were Witter and Ellsler. Each of the others were fined $20 and costs.

162 L Sept. 11:7/4

[ocr errors]

Philip Menncher and J. G. Whittlinger plead guilty to a charge of selling liquor contrary to law. They were fined $20 and costs each.

Laws

[ocr errors]

Twenty

163 L Jan. 31:7/3,4 - In a letter to the editor, S. K. B. says: years ago the people of Ohio put a clause in the constitution against licensing the sale of liquors. Since then a portion of citizens have been striving, through the action of the legislature, to make the clause as nearly void as possible. Now some agencies are hoping to influence the constitutional convention to recommend a license law with perhaps a local option clause and to retain the Adair law.

The

Do the people want a license law in this state? We believe not. license has been tried again and again and failed utterly. Did license decrease drunkenness? In three months under the license law there were 794 more cases than before.

Liquor sellers and drinkers heartily favor license, thus showing that it is not restriction which a license law obtains. A desire to cripple their own business or to make it difficult to gratify the appetite for drink would be an absurdity. A license law would not close three-fourths of the saloons. The principle of licensing is wrong. Why license an evil that makes brutes of men, paupers of women and children, and burdens the people of Ohio with taxes?

(2)

(1)

Our present laws are not a failure; therefore we do not wish the constitution changed. (30)

164 L Feb. 16:8/3 In a letter to the editor, "F" says: "Three-fourths of those favoring a license system for Ohio, are dealers in or drinkers of liquors. The balance are indifferent and despairing temperance men. These profess to hold that a 'drink house,' as it can be kept under a license system, is a real want and benefit to society; that under such a system there will be less drunkenness than under one closing the 'drink shops. '"

The people of Ohio, with its million sober women, will never select a

CLEVELAND NEWSPAPER DIGEST JAN. 1 TO DEC. 31, 1874

Abstracts 165 - 167

ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS - Laws (Cont'd)

"drink house" as the only shop of trade or traffic worthy to bear on its door lintel the escutcheon of the state. It is the dream of drink only. Possibly we may have further words for that fourth part of the license host, the indifferent, discouraged, despairing temperance man.

L Apr. 4; ed: 4/1 - See Politics & Government Ohio

(15)

"We may safely

165 L Apr. 8:5/3 In a letter to the editor, "W" says: say that the drinking of intoxicating liquors, and their sale for that purpose is evil, and only evil. For twenty years our present liquor laws have been on the statute books, a dead letter. I have lived long enough to see the practical working of a license law, I have seen the wife, heartbroken, entreat the liquor seller to spare her family, and I have seen him literally shake his license in her face, and defy her to help herself. Under our present laws the liquor seller can't do this, and that's what's the matter.'

166 L Apr. 10:6/2,3 In a letter to the editor, D. W. Gage says:
"Every voter in Ohio will be called upon at no very distant day to vote
on the question 'Shall the Liquor Traffic be Licensed. '

"Legitimate traffic may be regulated by license, and a revenue may properly be derived from it. But vice that cannot be regulated is never to be licensed, and should always be prohibited by law.

"Legislation should be so shaped, and public sentiment so educated and elevated, as to make liquor selling as disreputable and unpopular as it is wicked and debasing."

(8)

(18)

167 L Apr. 15; ed: 4/3,4 - When, a month ago, the leader of the temperance movement in Ohio raked up and began to enforce the law of 1854, prohibiting the sale of distilled liquors and foreign wines to be drunk on the premises, it became evident that all such troublesome but forgotten statutes would receive the early attention of the opponents of reform. Advantage would be taken of the fact that a Democratic legislature is now in session at Columbus. This attack upon the existing laws has already begun. The assault is led by Joseph E. Pearson, Democratic member from Miami, who has now before the legislature a bill to repeal paragraph 5, of section 199 of the law of May 7, 1869, which gives to cities and incorporate villages the power "To regulate, restrain and prohibit ale, beer and porter houses or shops; and houses or places of notorious or habitual resort for tippling or intemperance."

The repeal of this clause will be a severe blow to the cause of law and order in this state.

We cannot believe that the Republican members from Cuyahoga can be induced to support any such measure as that of Mr. Pearson. If they do so join the ranks of the reactionists they may rely upon being held to a strict account by a constituency which they will have grossly misrepresented."

(10)

CLEVELAND NEWSPAPER DIGEST JAN. 1 TO DEC. 31, 1874

Abstracts 168 - 171

ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS - Laws (Cont'd)

168 L Apr. 25; ed: 4/2 - "In Olmsted the village council has passed the McConnellsville ordinance, which winds up the liquor trade in that town. In Warren, and in other places where this now famous ordinance is already in force, the saloons and their patrons have found themselves at last opposed by a statute that means something."

169 L Apr. 30:3/1-3 - In the Cincinnati constitutional convention, the question of a license clause in the constitution being under discussion Amos Townsend, a member from Cleveland, said:

"What I claim to be the most effective and only practical way of disposing of this vexed question in this Convention, is to embody a clause in the Constitution, to be voted on separately as a special article, authorizing the Legislature to pass a license law, and if a majority of the people of the state are in favor of such a law, as I have no doubt they are, it will be adopted.

"The 'local option' is a law enabling each locality within the state to decide for itself whether the sale of intoxicating liquors shall or shall not be permitted within its limits. If the local option prevails in localities where the people vote against the traffic, it could and would be absolutely suppressed. Then every where the will of the people would be supreme, and the rights of all would be perfectly and thoroughly protected."

(4)

(47)

170 L Apr. 30; ed: 4/3,4 - There is in the convention a very commendable disposition to treat the license question fairly and judicially and a large majority of the members will support that measure which in their opinion authorizes the utmost restraint susceptible of thorough and successful enforcement. The recent debate has been mainly upon the following substitute for section 18 of the schedule:

"Section 1. At the time when the votes of the electors shall be taken for the adoption or rejection of this Constitution, there shall be separately submitted to the electors, for adoption or rejection, an additional section in the words following towit:

"Section 2. License to traffic in spirituous, vinous, or malt liquors, under such regulations, restrictions and limitations as shall be prescribed by law, may be granted, but this section shall not prevent the General Assembly from passing laws to restrain such traffic, and to compensate the injuries resulting therefrom."

(LEADER) "The adoption of this substitute will give the whole question of license or no license back to the people of Ohio to be decided by a popular vote. Should this happen, there will ensue one of the most important and exciting campaigns ever witnessed in this state."

171 L May 4:5/2 In a letter to the editor, "Protection" says: The convention has shirked the whole liquor question and thrown it upon the people to decide as to license or no license. There will always be two leading political parties. This fact has, and will in the future, enable the liquor interests to throw their whole weight in favor of one

(14)

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

ALCOHOLIC LIQUORS - Laws (Cont'd)

or the other and in that way be sure to control the legislature. If license is to be granted, the fee should be no less than $500 a year. Experience shows that every license system tried has increased rather than diminished the liquor traffic.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

172 L May 8; ed: 4/5 To the large class of men who really desire to restrict the liquor traffic and lessen its evils, it is a question of profound interest to know how they should vote upon the license question to be submitted in connection with the new constitution.

Every community has to provide for its own safety, and bear its own burdens. To take away the power of local protection against one of the worst evils, is an outrage too great to be commented upon with patience, under the live and vigorous temperance sentiments now awakened and established.

[ocr errors]

173 L May 9; ed: 4/4 The proposed license clause in the new constitu-
tion would lessen and restrict the power to legislate against the liquor
traffic, and this clause is in the interest of the liquor traffic and
not for the protection of the public against its evils. If the friends
of license really desired to restrict the traffic, and greatly lessen
its evils, they should have favored provisions in the constitution which
would have secured the essential features of such a system in the consti-
tution itself.

(17)

(17)

"The power of local protection against saloons which we now have, ought not on any account be given up, and because the adoption of a license clause would be a substantial surrender of this we are opposed to its approval by the people."

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

174 L May 12; ed: 4/1 After several days of debating, during which the liquor element fought every inch of the way, the Pennsylvania legislature has scotched the bill for the repeal of the local option law.

"All honor to the members of the Pennsylvania legislature who stood

up so valiantly for morality and good order."

(16)

(2)

[ocr errors]

175 L July 2:7/2 In a letter to the editor, "Justice" says:

[ocr errors]

"The law of Ohio provides that a man convicted of selling intoxicating liquer shall pay a fine of not less than five dollars nor more than $50, or be imprisoned in the jail of the county for not less than 30 days. One or more cases have been tried with what result?

"The salcon keeper, whom rumor says, has made hundreds of thousands in the last few years is fined $10 for each five violations of the law and $50 under the nuisance clause.

"The fines should be much larger."

(4)

[ocr errors]

176 L July 31; ed:6/1-4 In a letter to the editor, "I. S." says: attention has been called to a letter in the PLAIN DEALER by Judge A. M. Jackson of Bucyrus on the license question. Contrary to expectation, the judge, who is a temperance worker, has taken ground in favor of a license

My

CLEVELAND NEWSPAPER DIGEST JAN. 1 TO DEC. 31, 1874

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

and has disappointed the expectations of a great mass of Ohio temperance people. They are opposed to licensing drinking traffic in any form since drinking is immoral and any legislation looking to its protection is the same. The judge quotes executives of other states and prescnts statistics showing the effect of licensed liquor as remedy for intemper

ance.

Let us agitate and educate until we can elect good men to office, all over the state, and it will not be long till temperance men will blush that they plead for license.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

(65)

177 L Aug. 3:7/2,3 The Rev. Hiram C. Haydn of the First Presbyterian church of Cleveland speaks as follows on liquor licenses: "A thing we confess to be wrong we cannot, in consistency, license. There let it end. Let the voters of Ohio settle it. What ever becomes of the constitution, this article shall never go into it. To license iniquity is to treat it with a courtesy wholly unwarrantable. What the liquor men all want, what they spend money freely to promote, we do not want, the state does not need, cannot endure. Then away with it, and let the great reform go on."

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

178 L Aug. 4:7/2 The battle between temperance and intemperance for the state and nation is to be fought in Ohio between this and the 18th of August next, on the question of license or not license as submitted to the people in the new constitution. If the new constitution is not adopted the license will be killed even though a majority of the votes be cast for the license.

L Aug. 5; ed: 4/2 - See Constitutions

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][merged small]

(42)

(18)

179 L Aug. 6:7/3,4 In a letter to the editor, "R." says: I shall assume that in this age and generation absolute and effectual prohibition is impossible and undesirable. If that is granted, the only difference between the two provisions is that under one, trial may be made of license as restricted as the public sentiment will tolerate or as liberal as it will permit, and under the other, no such trial can be had. The liquor question is not wrong as has been said, that is, it isn't wrong to sell liquor for medical purposes. The difference between the two proposed clauses of the constitution has been greatly magnified. Under either we may have good temperance legislation or none at all. We may have free liquor under either or as restricted and limited a traffic as public sentiment of the state will demand and enforce.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

180 L Aug. 10:7/3 The Rev. C. N. Grant of the Franklin st. Methodist church spoke about the pulpit and the liquor license. He says: Honest men say you cannot stop the sale of liquor; now let's regulate it. If it is a fact that we have not been able wholly to stop it, is that any reason why we should pass a few laws depriving ourselves of the power to do so?

"The thing is impossible, the license proposition is a delusion, a dodge and a cheat, and should be voted down on the 18th of August.

(16)

(9)

« AnteriorContinuar »