New-York tribune., 1888-03-25
ILLINOIS.
HIGH LICENSE AND LOCAL OPTION.
NUMBER OF INHABITANTS TO TnE sorARE MILE
oa-LARGEsT CITY. CHICAGO, 503 1S5-ToTAL
POPULATION. 7,S71-ARrA, 56.650

POPULATION. 3.077,s71-ARrA, 5665O
sQUAR' MILES.
The High License law OF Illinois has attracted wide
attention because of the simplicity well as the strict
ness Of its provisions and of its application one of
the largest we'll of the most aotive and en-.
terprising Of the ctIes of the Union. No license to
sell wines and distilled liquors be granted in the
state OF Illinois for less than $500 year. With
that limitation as to the minimum license fec It's
amount is left to tho local authorities. who mako
1t as high they see it, The same rule applies 10
the license to sell malt liquors except that the mini
mum fee IS $3.50. Druggists arc allowed to sell for
medicinal and scientific purposes under permits from
local authorities who may also regulate such sales by
ordinance.
The local authorities are authorized to grant
licenses to keep so many dram shops In their county
as they may think the public good requires upon app-
cation By petition OF majority Of the legal voters Of
the town. II the county Is under township organization,
and II not under township organization, then OF q
majority OF the egal voters Of the election precinct
dc rct wherc the is proposed TO be located"
There are penalties Of fine and Imprisonment not ex-
ceedng 500 and thirty days for selling strong liquor
under malt liquor license. $1,000 bond is re-
quired for the payment Of damages sales to drunk
| ards, minors, etc.
The places where liquors arc unlawfuly sold become
nuisanccs and whoever keeps such place is fined
from $50 to 500 and imprisoned from twenty to fifty
days for each offence the place is also kept locked
until the keeper gives bonds in $1,000 not again to
| violate tbs law in that The act further pro-
vides:
Every person who shall by the saIo Of Intoxicating
liquors with or without license cause the intoXca
tion of any other person, shall be liable for and
ho iha & ase Of and for TO sd
Gated person and 50 per day In addition thereto for
consequence of such ntoxIcaton, which sums may be
recovered In an action OF debt before any court having
Any member Of the drunkards family who can
prove that he Is pecunlarily injured BY tho sale Of
not only against the seller but also the owner Of The
building In which the liquor Is sold and may also re-
IN the quor business Without The approvsl Of MAJOR MAJOR
ny Of the voters OF the town or district, the local
features.
GOVERNOR oGLEsBYs TEMPERANCE SENTIMENTS
Governor ogesby while not answering specifically
the questions propounded. gave permission for the pub
lcation of the following extracts from letter which
he had previously sent to Mr.. Lloyd OF The Tribuno7
| staff:
The act of 1874 was regarded the anal settlement
OF the law upon tho temperance question up to that
time and down until 1858, by all parties The high
license .act was offered upon the part OF tho people TO
meei The new iGea and organization TO prohibit the
manufacture and sale OF all intoxicating driDlS. 1t
was mainly, almost exclusively the work Of the Re
publican party enough Democratic votes were OBJ
stands up to the present time You aware, how
ever that there Is an organized Prohibition party In
the State which proposes repeal all existing laws
upon tbs subject for licensing the sale of intoxicating
liquor, ard In place OF 1t substitute prohibtory egs
atIon
require any, 10 show tho practical and actual effect OF
the license law upon the number OF licensed saloons
or dram shops since the 1888 It Is not orious
fact however land believe conceded all round) that
tic number Of licensed saloons has very considerably
statute. You will not forget however that there IS
no restriction upon county boards or upon municipal
ssber rate OF eeps ban bot ro an ing
s.atn,e OF loo5 our CITIES hequenfy TX tho ra;e at
has been TO reduce the number Of saloons In the State
iherG IN are enough however, as every one knows for
Illinois has earnestly endeeyored to deal with this
question In the best interests of temperance and
still feel as party that We cannot afford to SEQ tho
strength OF the party woal!ened by outside and in
Of he RGGIy ss s sT0aSS s
apa and no s sdSa party S SD all Of
citizens all that is possible to restrain the Vice Of
excessive Indulgence In intoxicating qqogs nr, ,,snv
Executive Chamber Springfield, III
REPUBLICANS
william II. Harper, who is the author of the Illinois
High License Act Of 1S63 responds as follows:
g Yes YES:
should not be changed. Tho advantages and pecuni
airy benefits Of this law a,e not only wonderful, but
900 to sl75oOo0, and the city has reduced the num-
the has o@ S Ss SsS
and has added to the police force Statistics num-
the Inc cuabe value and benefits Of this law 10 tho
peopo and ibe municipal corporations throu ghont the
tho enforcement Of this law have bean .crsssed rom
500 600 to over u 800 600 and hence the burden Of
taxation on other articles has bean lessened thereby
enhancing tho wealth and peace OF the people Of this
great commonwealth, reducing the number Of saloons
in the state from 1900 TO less than 00O enabling
cities like tho Capital Chicago, Peoria Quincy Bloom
hns,0n1; JscESOnvilc and many Others to pave and
Chicago, III. WILLIAM n HARPER
Following are the views of A. NJ Pence, chairman
Of tho Committee Political Action Of the Chicago
Union League Cub
, ~ Yes. Ny reasons are as follows: It has reduced
the number OF saloons at least 33 per cent This Is
great gain In villages and smaller towns the mum
oef OF customers IS too small to justify an enterprise
recurring so great An adv ance payment as our high
license law demands In our greater cities, such as
manner corresponds with the Increase Of population
M The number Of saloons in 1850 was about 1000 and
law discrimnatcs between distilled and terncntad o
sna 4S S ns iendeaey In s to abandon 3 @ me e Of
are more ably conduced as tho Keepers have
claimed by prohbfIonss that tho numbsf q arrests
,or drunksnness s creator than before The high license
not only in this ely but throughout tho State has
PEE been greatly increased very largely indeed as the re
t2) II Is difficult TO answer this question It may
he the best Law BAT atainable undcr the present
CohuIOnS In our STATE The pest law WOnld 90 ono
that would entirely repress the sale Of distilled spirits
as beverage, and no man who cares for his kind
ought TO doubt 1t. But such law In State With
our mixed population Is simply impossible Of execu
ton
l3l think the limo should be strictly drawn between
distilled and feraenied liquors. Oar statute puts |
wine WITH distilled liquors and requires 1900 license
for re sale Wine shoud be placed with beer, under
,he lower license u Is also my opinion that ,ho
stand 5l 500 Iccnss for whske and $500 for beer
and wine In Chicago beer and and wine now pay $500
but whiskey should pay $1,000 OF $1,000. such
license fee would OF reduce whiskey saloons 10
minimum. one department Of our city government |
to-day advocates the Raising OF the license as may be
done lpdcr the law. Ia connection with high license
should have local option law extending not only
10 counties. villages. towns and cities. bui also 10
wards of city and 10 portions OF the ward. This |
would be practical prohibition but only fast AZ shs
peo pie OF Zach lor Atty should desire This would De
true con y, omsc. Such law oonld bo excfuted- /
but general prohibition law In great cities cannot be-
Chicago. A. N. PENCE
Isaac l.. Morrison writes