The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-05-01
THE LIQUOR-DEALERS TAXES.
A Growl Against the Drug Stores-The Bonds
of the SalOon-Keepers.

The publication in yesterdays Journal show
ing how little the saloon-keepers bear of the
burden of the taxation in this city created con-
siderable stir and comment among that frater-
nifty.
while you were about it," said West Wash
ington street saoon-keeper to the reporter, 'you
ought to be strictly fair and impartial, to have
published the names of the druggists in this city
who sell whisky by the drink, and bottled beer
to be drunk on the premises. There are about
eighty drug stores in this city, and it is within
bounds to say that at least seventy of them vo
late the law by selling intoxicating drinks with
out either paying the one hundred dollars license
to the State, or the fifty-two dollar license to
the city. Why don't you publish the names of
those fellows-giye us the names of the drug
gists who saloon keepers without paying any
license. We are better taxpayers than those
fellows"
for which you pay-and violate the law, why
don't you prosecute them?"
"Oh," was the answer, 1--WE don't care to 60
into the spy business We would rather lose
some of our customers, as we do by these drug
stores, than interfere with them"
'sPll tell you what's the matter" said a by
stander, "the reason druggists are not informed
against and punished is because the saloon
keepers-nearly all of them-violate the liquor
law in every way possible. If they did not do so
they would be in position to make the pill men
suffer, and soon retire them from the field as
competitors in the business. Don't tell me that
a. oil bo,, fa1
Liquor League couldn't break up the selling of
drink by druggists by the glass in very short
time it not for the fact that they are afraid
to stir things, being law breakers themselves
A few minutes later a merchant said to the
reporter: ''Why don't you 60 to the county
auditors books and find on how many liquor
dealers bonds the names of the brewers Of this
city appear. 1t will make second chapter to
the figures the Journal gives this morning. It
will probably suggest to the County Commission
erS that this matter of saloon keepers bonds is
very loosely looked after" AS the same sugges
ton had been given to the reporter two days
earlier by saloon-keeper who is Independent
of the brewers, and there are all told, less than
twenty in this city who are so, the reporter con-
cluded to investigate the matter.
Each applicant for license to retail vinous,
malt and spirituous liquors in less quantities
than quart, to be drunk on the premises be-
fore being granted a license by the County Com
missioners has to file bond, with sureties, in
the amount of s., 0O0 The brewers of this city
are in most cases the sureties on these bonds
the wholesale liquor dealers signing compare
lively few. More than 175 of these bonds are
signed by one or the other Or both the Schmidts,
John W. Schmidt and Edward Schmidt. One
hundred red and seventy-ve times $1,000 places
plicate, John W. Schmidt and Ed
ward Schmidt are not, personally
worth so much money. The tax
duplicate shows that John w. Schmidt pays
only Sc, IT'S. These amounts seem hardly suff-
clent where so much is in jeopardy, and such
security would probably not be considered good
elsewhere thar in the County Commissioners
Court, and not there except where the retail
liquor business is interested But it may be
that the attention of the commissioners has never
before been directed to the matter The c. F.
Schmidt & Co. property is taxed upon a valua
ton of $2OS. 16O, but that property and the indi
vidual names of John w. and Edward Schmidt
appended to the bonds of these It's or
more saloon-keepers are very different
things. :. The name of Peter Lieber
is signed to several scores Of these bonds. BY
the tax duplicate Peter Lieber is exhibited as
paying tax upon only So, $50. The Peter Lieber
q Go. brewery is very different affair." That
institution pays on $4,000. Peter Liebers in
terest in the brewery may be large, or it may be
SMALL His name is signed only as the ndi-
VlQudl refer Ll0Oer TO tnoSo DOnQS. The names
of Frank A. Maus and G. A. Maus, of the Maus
brewery, are signed to a large number of the
bonds, with better showing Frank A. Maus
paying upon SCI, $50, and G. Albert Maus upon
$l1, 725.
In the list of 27S mot 272 as before given)
saloon keepers published in the Journal as pay
ing on personal property amounting to $l07-
AS, fifty two of these pay on less than 800 per-
sonal That is one seventh Of the saloon keep
ers give in their personal property-their
saloons, glassware, fixtures and liquors and
their household goods-at less than 800, some
of them giving in only $40 or $50 and some of
them no personal property at all.
1t begins to look as if this liquor interest, so
costly to the taxpayer, is not the wealthy and
powerful force it has been representing itself to
be; that this great image, the form whereof has
seemed so terrible, with it's arms of silver and
its belly and thighs Of BRASS" stands upon feet
largely composed of clay.