Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1879-01-15
TEMPEST IN A TEAPOT.
The Truly Good Citizens of Winona All
Tore Up on the Liunor Question.
Specia1 Teleora m tn the Glnha

WNoNA, Jan. 14-Au immense audience
composed of the best citizens met at the court
house, last night, to protest against the repeal
of the present lew regulating the sale of liquors
IN this city. John Ludwig made speech in
behalf of repeal, claiming the law was very
unjust to the liquor sellers. After an excited
discussion, strong resolutions against repeal
were passed, and committee of twelve of the
most prominent citizens Of Winona were ap-
pointed to go to st. Paul and work against the
passage of Senator Bucks bill by the House.
wHAfssENAroR BUCK SAYS.
Upon the receipt Of the above excited tele-
gram, reporter Of the GLOBE sought out the
author of the bill, Senator G. f. Buck, and
asked him to tell all about it,
In the first place." said the Senator,
there's nothing of it. The legislature last
winter without the knowledge of the common
council Of Winona, and against the wishes Of
the majority OF the members, as we'll as of q
large part of the best citizens of the place
passed bill engrafting upon the charter of the
city the provisions of the State law relative
to the sale of liquor to minors. 1t provides
that dealers should give a bond of $500 to obev
this provision of the law, and visited as a pen.
atty for transgression the full force of the
bond, and also provided that the city attorney
q
moity for each conviction of $50. This was
considered an infringement of the rights of the
people of the city represented in the common
council. Before the passage of that law the
council had regulated the sale of liquors with
rare success. They had exacted the highest
license rate allowed by law-$1OO-aud had
shown no disposition to encourage or increase
Indulgence in liquor The passage OF the re-
pealing bill simply leaves the matter where it
has always been, and always ought to be-in
the hands OF the common council"
but see you are charged with procuring
the passage of the bill by stealth?''
There's nothing of the kind can be laid at
in that any other matter. Whatever do is
open and above board. The chief objection to
the bill of last winter that it was al, at
tempt to regulate by State law what should be
lett TO the common council. think-and SO
90 the majority of the people of the CITY of
Wlnona-that the common council is capable
of wisely regulating local affairs, including the
sale OF liquor. The passage of my bill does
not remove any of the restraints under which
liquor sellers labor-will not stimulate drunk
enness in the least, and if the people under
stood its purpose, none of them would object
to it,
well, the whole thing looks like tempest
in teapot
Precisely. The only thing I object to is
"
have not done. 1t was merely local bill.
which Senators never interfere with provided
the local member takes the responsibility,''
With thanks for the Senator'S courtesy. the
interview terminated.
Declining to Allow the Fees.
Within the week, the supreme court has affirmed
decision OF the district court Judge simons, which
is OF importance!o the average paying taxpayer.
The case was that of Albert Armstrong va. The
County Commissioners of Ramsey county, and was
brought to recover s., 539.23. The history OF the
case is pretty well known. The amount was charged
by Armstrong county clerk fees for entering tax
judgments in 1871 It was claimed that the service
had been done during vacation of term, was war
ranted in law, etc. The county commissioners re-
fused the bill, and thereupon suit was brought A
hearing on evidence and argument was had before
Judge Smons who decided that there was no grounds
upon which the action could be maintained holding
that the statute provided salary and established the
fees pertaining to the clerks Office.
Subsequently in March of 1873 the plaintiff moved
for new trial. the several points O that the dec
sion was not justified by the evidence 2 that it was
contrary to law and (3) because of error in law oc-
curing during the trial and excepted to by plaintiff
The motion was denied, and an appeal taken, which
has resulted in the affirmation of the decision of the
lower court. The case has been conducted for the
county by County Attorney Rogers, and the plaintiff
has been represented by Hon. II. j. Horn. Besides
Ike Importance of saving the amount Of 49, 500 to the
taxpayers, it settles similar pending or which
have been held in allegiance to hear of the decisen
In this case.