Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-12-20
LIQUOR LICENSES.

At the last meeting OF the council an
ordinance was adopted increasing the
amount of license for selling liquor to
$500 per year. This ordin nee the mayor
sent back to the council, thinking that
body might wish to modify it. On the con-
clusion of the reading of the mayors COM
munication the following protest, signed
by those who are members of the execu-
tive committee of the association for the
Protection of Personal Liberty. was read:
To the Honorable. tbs Common Council of
the City of st. Paul:
GENTLEMEN: The undersigned. the ex-
ecutive committee of the Liquor Dealers
association of this state, availing them
selves of the right of petition, which is
conceded to exist to all citizens, respect
fully request permission to lay before you
this communication from the association
which we represent, and in which we have
been instructed to renne=t of your honora-
BILE body the reconsideration of the resolu-
ton lately passed by You by which licenses
of retail liquor dealers in the city of st.
Paul have been increased from 800 to
5000 per annum.
We further take the liberty to lay before
yo1 that your attention may be thus di-
rectly called to them, few reasons why we
think the Objectionable resolution should
be rescinded and the licenses fixed at the
former amount; and,
First. we point out to your honorable
body that in no other city in the North
west is the license fixed at the sum of $500.
In our sister city of Minneapolis it is only
500; in the city of Chicago it is only $50,
and in the city,of Milwaukee it does not
exceed the sum of 500. Unless some rea-
son, and that fairly good one, can be
given why the rule which the experience of
the cities named has demonstrated to be
proper and fair one should now be changed,
and the policy which has obtained in this
city since its foundation should also be
changed doubling the amount Of the IL
censes-we submit they should be permit
ted to remain. And We have not yet
been advised or informed of
any argument which has
been presented for your consideration
which is a sufficient or any foundation for
the proposed change.
Secondly, We desire to call the attention
of your honorable body to the fact that
the ma jority of retail liquor dealers in this
city, and particularly those who would be
most seriously affected by the raising of
dealers living in the outskirts of the city,
whose dealing in liquor is usually simply
in addition to the stock of groceries which
they carry and who usually deal not in the
fermented liquors but only in beer We
can say, without fear of contradiction,
that as to the class of persons we have ad-
verified to, they compare in their habits.
demeanor and conduct, with any
other class of citizens; nor are
their places of business Objectionable
either in their conduct or in the class of
persons who are found therein, being gro
Gerry stores they are resorted to only by
respectable people who desire to make
purchases or who desire in the evening to
meet their neighbors for friendly chat
over glass of beer or cigar. As to this
class of dealers the fixing of the license at
$500 will act as a practical prohibition,
and the result viii be that the sale of malt
liquors at retail will be driven ont from the
respectable localities and small stores in the
suburbs where it is now sold, and in their
place will he found one saloon devoted en-
tirely to the purpose Of liquor selling
alone, and conducted by some individual
VINO, regardless of his character Or capac-
ity, sees au opportunity to make profit
sufficient to warrant him in paying the ex-
cessive license; thus, we think. producing
more evil, and to greater extent, than
formerly existed.
Thirdly, we submit to your honorable
body that unless it can be salts
factorily shown that the business
of the retail liquor dealers is the
cause of an additional aud excessive
expense in maintaining and operating the
city government, that that business should
not be taxed out Of proportion with any
other occupation which it is within your
power to regulate.
And further, we desire to say. that we
know of no principle of fair taxation or
justice upon which business that is so
legitimate in itself that 1t is recogized and
licensed should be made to bear an inor-
dinate or unusual proportion of the taxa
ton of the city; and the more so as nearly
every individual engaged in that business
contributes in addition TO his license fee
his regular and large proportion of the
taxation of the city both
on real and personal property.
And, lastly, we desire to meet by fair ar
gument suggestion which has been made
in favor of high license; that is, that the
enactment of high license ordinances will
result in driving out OF existence the dis