The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-07-11

1t. Aud these have been attended with varying
results. In some cases, mainly the towns hav
lng population of less than 3,0OC the law has
closed the saloons. In others they have shut
their doors temporarily, and then opened them
after the excitement had passed. In still others
no effort has been made. while in several litiga-
ton is now pending in the courts. The seventh
question was designed to cover this phase of the
case. 1t was: Has any effort been made to
enforce the present law. and with what suecess?'
The city marshall of Red OAK answers, Yes,
with good success" The mayor of Charles
City says, Eyes, but with very poor, if any
success" In Clinton Sioux City, Lyons and
Davenport nothing whatever has been
executing it. In Keokuk 'There was an effort,
but it failed completely" In Anamosa the sue
cess was almost complete" In Cedar Falls
prohibition prohibits" In burlington the
mayor states it has been decided failure" In
Museatine 'there has been some effort to enforce
che law, with no good results" In Winterset
''the traffic has been suppressed oneh half In
Ottumwa there have been strenuous efforts,
with little success" In Dubuque 100 njunctions
are now pending, and the situation is similar at
Council Bluffs.
''How is the revenue formerly derived from
saloons obtained now2" This was the eighth
question to which responses were invited 1t Is
an outgrowth of the sixth inquiry relating to
revenue. Ten Cities according to the reports
received, have increased their annual tax levy,
while fifteen have made no provision for the def
posed while few say that the saloons having
been closed the expense which they caused has
been dispensed with, but in the majority of
instances the cities are embarrassed by the loss
Of this source of revenue
Has the prohibitory law been failure or is 1t
success2 The answer may be found in the sta
tistcs already furnished, but TO arrive more
directly at the views of those in position to
have opinions worth quoting this question was
asked; From your experience in an official
CaDacltV present
Jaw as adVisahleW The replies were as follows:
Red Oak. II do not. with proper effort 1T can
be enforced with benefit, to ALL" Charles City,
"You bet" Clinton. Yes, by all means" Boone,
81 certainly do, and would favor wholesome
license law" Charlton No Keokuk, Il do"
Anamosa mot until it has more extended
trial" Lyons, 81 do most emphaticaly." Dav-
export, ii do" Cedar Falls, Let us give it a
fair trial Burlington, Yes" Muscatine,
''Most undoubtedly" Winterset mo" OF
tumwa, II do not see that the present law has
suppressed intemperance' Dubuque, For
the good Of the State ! do most
Manchester, cit has not been sufficiently tried
to test it's merits" Grinnell, II do not regard
the repeal of the present law advisable" Cen
treville, Local option is just, equitable and
ion until know what's to take its place" Abba,
81 would regard the repeal of the present law as
great calamity" Iowa City, Il regard the
repeal as advisable" Sioux City, eff high
license law with restrictions were enacted, l do"
Clarnda, "No." Maquoketa, Eyes, if good gov
eminent and decency are to prevail"
In connection with the foregoing, the most
intelligent opinion of the workings of the pro-
hibitory law can only be formed by considering
the size of the cities from which advices have
been received. The general resutmay be stated
in this way: Prohibition prohibits to some
tent in small towns; in the large cities 1t does
not. The population of the several places named
as given by the last national census was, in
1890 as follows: