Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1886-09-30
High License.

| One of tile main arguments used by
prohibitInnists is that the liquor law OF
| Missouri is not enforced, and hence they
argue that the state should have pro-
hibition. Followed out their line of
| reasoning would end this way: A man
who will not pay small debt will GER
| tainly pay big one. In other words,
they hold that because reasonable
law cannot be enforced an unreasonable
one can be. We never hear of the pro.
hibitionists trying to enforce the pres
ent laws, but they yell themselves
hoarse asking for a law a thousand
times harder to enforce. Missouri un-
doubtedly hes good law regulating
the sale of Intoxicating drinks, as any
one can learn by examining the Down
ing high license law.
In all eases except in cities of $500
Inhabitants and over,a majority of tax
paying citizens must sign petition for
dramshop before license can be is
sued, and in cities of the class referred
to, two-thirds of the tax-paying resi-
dents of the block in which the dram
shop is to be located must sign petit
ton for the same. From this it will be
observed that saloon cannot be forced
on any community against the wishes
of majority of the tax-paying citizens.
And this is not all. The applicant for
license must be man of good charac-
ter and give bond for $4,000, with
two or more securities, to keep an
orderly house, pay all fines and obey
the provisions of the law.
Heavy fines are imposed and q for
feiture of license incurred where liquor
is sold OH Sunday or upon election
days, or for selling to minors, habitual
drunkards. etc. 1t is needless to emu
merate all the requirements ofthe law.
Every fair=mindeu person admits that
the law Ia u good one and that it meets
every emergency. But this does not
satisfy the prohibitionists, as it is not
what they want. We doubt very
much ii one out of fifty of them ever
read the law.
The revenue derived from dramshop
license is worth looking after. No bet
ter authority ON this subject can be
quoted than Mr.. John T. Clarke, who
in recent letter published in this pap
er said:
1.-The high license system prevailing
in Missouri lessens the number of
increases the amount of |
revenue derived from them, 0bolishos |
the crossroad or country saloon and |
confines the sale OF Intoxicating liquors |
under the surveilanoe of the police. |
For the year ending July 4, 1882, there
were 3,469 licensed dramshops and 132
wine and beer houses in this state, from |
which were derived state and county |
taxes, amounting to $547 ,320.30. For |
the year ending July 4, 1886. the num-
Der of dramshops will not exceed 2,S0J,
and the state and county licenses paid |
by them amounts to not less than |
81 SOC. 900.
have official returns from 100 coun.
ties, eighteen of which are without IL
censed dramshops, The SO granting
license report a,d75 dramshops of which |
1918 are in the city of St.Louis
and 366 in Jackson county. These 1875 /
paid for the year ending
July 4, 1856, state and county licenses
81 .420, ,065.S6. Fifteen
are yet to hear from, which
will probably increase the number of
lramshops l25, aud the revenue not
less than $50, 900. I am unable to
furnish the amount of town and city
revenue collected, but, exclusive of st.
Louis, the amount will not fall very
lar short of $500, 600, SO that the entire
state, county and town licenses will
amount to about ST 500, 900. In a ma
ority of counties the state license is
s25 for six months and $3.50 for the
county, but in many counties the H. t,
sense is higher. some placing the state
license at $40, $50, aud even $50, and