Los Angeles daily herald., 1875-02-27

To the Honorable Members ofthe Com
mon Council Of the City of Los
angels, CAL:
GENTLEMEN: An ordinance passed
by your Hoporable Council on the
eighteenth day of February instant,
fixing the bonds to be given by saloon
keepers and others at five hundred
dollas, and virtually setting aside an
other ordinance passed by your said
Council and regularly approved by me
as Mayor on the twenty-second day of
January last, by which the said bonds
were fixed at two thousand dollars,
was presented to me for approval by
the City Clerk on the twentieth day of
February instant, and / hereby return
the same to him, according to law,
without my approval, my objections
to said ordinance being the following:
In my opinion, the ordinance fixing
the said bonds at two thousand dollars
was a Use one and should be contin-
ued in force. If so, it will have the
| effect to elevate the tone of all the
saloons and places of public enter
tainment, and probably to close. up the
lowest class taverns and groggeries
which are so great an evil in every
community.
1t was said that this higl, figure of a
bond was injurious to poor old men
who could not work and had recourse
| to tavern-keeping for aliving. doubt
| whether this be correct, as / am in
| formed that most, if not all, the keep
| ers of those low groggeries are able
| bodied men who could easily toll for
| their daily bread, as we'll as those who
waste their earnings to support them.
But, were this assertion true, for the
sake of few persons are you prepared
! to allow this standing, enticing occa-
| sion to hundreds of working men to
uselessly and lavishly spend their
money? The man coming home with
his weeks hard-earned salary is often
enticed into those low groggeries and
does not get out of them until his last
cent has gone into the pocket of the
tavern-keeper. He then goes home
| penniless, in disgusting state, to his
wife who has long been waiting for the
coin to buy food and garments for the
little ones, but nothing is left for that
object. Bad humor, quarrels and des-
pair are substituted for the long.ex-
| pected comfort. Oftentimes the dis
couraged mother will prostitute her
! own daughter and advise her son to
rob, in order to procure the necessaries
of life, the price of which has been
wasted in the grog-shop.
The majority of those low taverns
are nests of crime and infamy. 1t is
| in their dark corridors, with the help of
| poisoned liquors, that thefts and house,
| breaking are concocted. The men who
keep them do not labor for their daily
bread, but lead useless, lazy life, re-
| lying only on the bad passions of the
! people for their support. They do not
| produce anything for the community,
unless it be scandal, desolation and
| dishonor.
1t was said that the enforcing of the
$4,000 bonds, would occasion loss of
five hundred dollars month in the
revenues of the city. This assertion
lacks proof, so far, and before repeal
| ing that ordinance a sufficient time
ought to be allowed to test its effect
in that, as well as IN every other re-
| gard. The object of said ordinance
was to uphold good morals in this
1 city,b closing up the deHs of infamy,
the schools of immortality. Would our
city, with population of thirteen
thousand inhabitants, consent to keep
up those generators of crime and
felony, for the consideration of five
hundred dollars per month?
| But this is mistake. The closing
up of the low grog shops | refer to, will
cause no loss to the city; the nume-
Gus police force which we have now to
pay, is kept busy, for the most part,
looking after them and their custom
ers. Close them up and in short
time you will find that one-half of the
actual number of policemen will be
sufficient, and you will save the five
hundred dollars, only on the salary Of
policemen.
But the closing up of said grog
shops will do better than that. A
consequence wiIl.be that the working
man after his days or weeks labor
will go straight home with his earn
ings, and carry with him good exam
pie, good humor, happiness and COM
1 fort.
1t has also been stated that the said
bond was arbitrary and that no one
ever saw such restrictions. This is a
mistake, in most of the Eastern cities
they have much more stringent regu-
latiOns than ours concerning taverns,
which are closed at II, and even at II
| O'clock at night, and are not allowed
| to open on Sundays. | am informed
that in our own State, in the city of
Sacramento, not many years ago, the
tax paid by saloons was five hundred
dollars year, and the bonds required
from them five thousand dollars.
Some people believe that our commu-
nifty could not subsist without the
| poor mans taverns. ! am of quite
different opinion, and believe that
the less we have of them the better.
A tavern-keeper, with family,
must make an expense of at least five
or six dollars per day for rent, license,
house expenses, etc; let us call it five
dollars per day; if he sells drinks at
five cents glass, we shall suppose he
takes benefit of two cents upon the
sale of each glass; he must then sell
two hundred and fifty glasses per day
to meet his expenses. This number
of glasses will intoxicate at least
twenty-five of the most robust drink
ers, and will carry hatred, quarrel and
desolation in as many families. So, in
order to support that man, you
| allow twenty-five families to suffer-
Suppose each of these families to
contain four persons, they aggregate
one hundred persons. Who will you
choose to protect, four persons or one
hundred. Will not more good derive
from protecting the larger than the
smaller number? Let those tavern
keepers work at some other trade or
occupation for their living, as we'll as
those they now intoxicate, and the
community will derive great benefit
from it.