The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-05-02
THE REVENUES FROM SALOONS.
A Contrast Between Business-Mr. Coy's
Plaintive Appeal for the Poor Man.

In the list of saloon keepers published in the
Journal on Thursday, showing the property,
real and personal, upon which they pay taxes,
the realty attached to the name of Herman
Altman, whose place of business is at AZ vir-
ginia avenue, was in some way omitted in
transcribine the amounts from the duplicate to
the reporters notebook. Mr.. Altman having
complained, the Journal, which desires to treat
the matter in every way fairly, hastens to make
the correction. The duplicate shows that Mr..
Altman pays on 81. 525 of real estate. one poll
and one dog, and on only 1925 worth Of personal
property, the latter including his liquors,
counters, glassware and household furniture.
The amount of his real estate has nothing to do
with the point the Journal made in its publica-
ton, as that amount is not invested in his
business-his business investment after
the value of his household furniture is deducted
from the 1925 Of personal, being exceedingly
small.
August Woerner, 81 East Washington street,
complains that he has been classed with the
figure heads and asks that he be given credit
for the real estate he holds. The mistake in
Mr.. Woerner's case doubtless arose from a SINH
larity in names, one Woerner being taken and
another left The tax duplicate shows that
August Woerner pays on real estate listed at
1900, and on p~ersonal-saloon and fixtures and
household effects--amounting to only $50. Mr..
Woerner's saloon, by reason of its location, on
Washington street, between Pennsylvania and
Delaware streets, is among the most prominent
in the city, and yet. to give all his
personal effects to the saloon valuation,
as represented on the tax duplicate,
he has only $50 invested in his business.
There is no business in the city that makes a
pretense Of being business at all that yields so
little to the revenue of the county, and city as
that Of the retail liquor dealer, while all the bust
one-tenth Of the expenditure Of taxpayers
money that follows the retailing of intoxicating
drinks. 1t is we'll worth consideration that 278
saloon keepers pay on a total OF $l07, lao of per
soual property. There are single houses on Meri-
dian street that do not cost the city government
20 cents a year that give nearly as much money
toward paying the cost of the government as all
the liquor interests put together in the way OF
taxes. Dealers like Mr.. Altman and Mr..
Woerner are substantial citizens, they
have real estate, and the tax on their saloons,
though small, is paid. A large number of
saloon-keepers, however, the reporter is in
formed, having no real estate, and the value of
their saloon property being so small, escape
pIyluE tdAGS dlLOEcIuGT. III dSSeSSCTS diSO
complain that while it is easy enough to place a
valuation on real estate it is difficult to do so on
saloon property, and, as the word Of the owner
has to be taken, there is little doubt in the minds
OF the assessor that the personal property is
greatly undervalued in a majority of cases.
Councilman Sim Coy, who is on the tax dupli-
cate rs paying on only 5000 personal and poll,
and nothing else, but who is not backward about
speaking for the poor man." as he puts 1t, ex-
pressed the opinion to the reporter that il would
ha n OYaof ipircfiaa RI add a cin0la dn11ap RI thu
saloon city license. He said he was in favor of
taking off the $52 now paid, as he thought the
saloon should stand on the same basis as all
other businesses, and pay only such taxes as are
sonal property. Mr.: Coy was reminded that
neither the law of the United States nor the
State law put the retail liquor dealer on tho
same plane as other business men, but that they
to pay special taxes in the way of licenses.
Mr.. Coy then, with a very know
ing wink, informed the reporter that the
thing had 'been fixed" and the city license
would not, at the next meeting Of the Council,
be raised to 800. Mr.. Coy declined to state
what Republican assistance had been secured,
or what member had been prevailed upon to alb
sent himself, but was emphatic in tie assertion
that the attempt to increase the license would
be defeated.
In the News, yesterday, Councilman Spahr
expressed himself in favor Of raising the saloon
license to 800 a year. He said: Zone hundred
dollars a year is as high as we can go under the
present law, and / do not think that is too much,
for l believe that about half the expenses of the
police system and criminal courts are caused by
the saloon business"
"Will the ordinance pass2"
II think it will, as amended, as I suggested.
l will not be here at the next meeting, because 1
have to 60 to Gettysburg in this monument
business, and if it comes up then, [ shall ask
that my vote be recorded in it's favor, or will
pairoff with some Democrat. lido think, however,
that it was impolitic in the Republicans to bring
up this matter at the present time, for it will
hurt us at the election this fall, and may result
in giving the Democrats control of the city
government But that is a matter of politics;
and as a question of right the saloons should be
made to pay the 800 license fee."