St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1891-11-14


that short time than at any meeting for
months past. IN fact thai body even
found time after its oWn immediate al
fairs had been disposed Of TO censure
the board Of corrections and charities
in scathiBg terms for The removal OF
John West from the Office OF sUperiH-
tendent OF the workhouse. The mem
bers. with the exception OF Aid. Bar
rows and Durham, were all present and
all In the humOr for business. although
al times their views did not coincide
perfectly, and the usual inclination TO
discussion was apparent
VIII Not BE Repealed.
The special committee. consisting OF
AID. bradiSh and Lackey and CITY AT
tOrney Russell. 10 whom was referred
the ordinance 10 repeal the present
liQuOr ordinance, reported adversely
upon that measure. setting forth IN de-
tail lis objections. tie principal of
which are as follows: The ordinance
now presented provides for Tie entire
repeal OF what is commonly known a.
the liquor ordinance, when WAS passed
by the city council on The 2gih day of
March. 1889. Ii Is The only ordinance
subject. By lis terms il fOTHids The
selling OF liquor within the CITY
without license. provides the manner
OF applying for ana obtaining license.
makes an Investigation OF the applicant
possible, cOnpels the applicant 10 make
an am dSyiI OF certain facts. which. if be
Is unable 10 make. VIII prevent his GET
ting q license. for the purpose of keep
ing improper Characters uut OF the bus
mess. Ii also regulates The heen>e
after il has been issued To him. Il for
bids the sale Of liquor 10 minors
and habifual drunkard>: forbias the
keeping open Of saloons uu sun
day or any general election
day or day of riot; fOTbids gambling in
saloons or the fTeQuenting OF Them b.
prostitutes. or the employment OF lewd
women. or The keeping open between y
and > O'Clock al night; provides Tor tie
revocation OF any license by the mayor
or city council. whenever such revuca-
ton shall be for the public gOOd. or 10y
the court in case Of conviction for lie
violations or any OF lis provisions.
The question presenting Itself is. is
the repeal of This ordinance demanded
in the interests Of public or ier. and in
such interest. Is II best that The ely be
without any law controlling and regu-
iuL4H- LlC llG4tI Du>tiftS>r
There are several reasons why The
municipal ordinance is better than the
state law. and The principal one : that
under the municipal ordinance there
can br summary and speedy trial. and
the efectOf d conviction j. not lost by a
long delay which follows a prosecution
under the state law.
Another reason why the law should
not be repealed Il that lis repeal il bot
demanded by any portion of Ihe COM
nunity excepting the iOOnkReperS.
WHO have themselves been prosecuted
and convicted for violations OF the OrdI-
nance.
The report then sets forth many rea-
sons Why the saloons should be kept
closed Sunday. the principal Of which Is
that there Is more idleness on that day.
ana consequently more tendency 10
drunkenness. and concludes IS follows:
in view of these suggestions We would
respectfully recommend thai the O-di-
nance referred 70. providing for the re-
peal OF the present liquor ordinance, be
laid on The table.
Aid. BraZie moved the adoption of the
Tepor. and Aid. Rand A. an amendment
moved he adoption OF a substitute or
dnancc. R2n4's motion was ruled out
of order by President Potter ana he
Immediate. y withdrew his substitute or
dinance. refusing 10 diYulge its prOvis-
ions 10 the reporters. The motion 10
adopt the report was then unanimou sly
passed. Later Aid. Rand gave notice
that al the next meeting he would in
trOduee an ordinance 10 amend the
present liquor ordinance.
Braziess Bomb.
The most interesting feature of the
following remarkable motion by Aid
BraZie:
Thai he action Of The board Of corrections
erG charities VINO by tlei- vote have Tirtu-
ally removed Supt. John West from the Gus
todv % the worknou>e 10 which position h
vas almost uusni Hl0Usiy electe,i BY he body
= ga III l>t-ce ~ from ne evidence submit
ted. tAe sid board OF corrections and charities
had no calse ~ said removal. Il : the
sense q TINS body fast he removal was ea-
tirely EucaLeG for. 0nd ~ eueTgeIicsl1 pro
lest against suCh removal
The reSclutSOn was 4 great 81 rprise
TO most 0f those present and fell ike a
/ IBunderbolt among them. Aid. Rand
was first 10 catch bis breath and moved
that Il be laid on the table. The motion
was lost. however, by vote of eleven
70 twelve.
Aid. McGowsn then moved TO refer il
( 10 the committee on workhoUse and his
motion was also lost.
Aid. BraZie moved the adoption of the
! resolution. stating that when an officer
J elected bv the council was removed bv
another body without cause. even
though it WAS done legally. he thought
/ it time for the council 10 express lis dis
! approval.
Aid. IngenhntI said The could not see
what the council had to say in the mat
ter any way since the control Of the
4 NOrkhouSe and It's officers had passed
/ into the hands OF the board of correc-
tons and charities. Aid. Lackev ex-
/ plessed himself in the same strain.
aid. LOveli said be thought the board
! should make is reasons public. If il had
any. and since none had been made
public il was but fair 70 presume that
there were no good reasons.
Aid HAYNES made strong speech in
defense of the board. stating that he
had every reason 10 believe full
+ Justice had Deen done Mr.. West.
and suggesting that If Mr.
West had been unJustly treated
/ be could step forth and demand a vindi-
cation instead Of submitting quietly.
/ lie stated that he considered the motion
untimely. as perhaps the board had
/ withheld the details Of its investigation
from the public ont Of consideration for
/ Supt. Vests feelings.
Here AID. BraZie grew warm in the
! collar. and exploded The positive state
ment that the beard Of corrections and
charities was born in iniQuity, and
alluded with much bitterness 10 the fact
/ that L mas composed Of four Democ- ats
and only one Republican. He said as a
/ friend OF Mr.. West he was authorized
/ 10 say that the board was perfectly al
! liberty To make the full report Of its in
Vestigations public.
Aid. Rand and Bradisb also opposed
! the adoption OF the motion. bu. il passed
j nevertheless 10y a vote Of y 10 10. Aid.
! Haynes. kiichli. Rand, Robbins. Brad
I ism. AcGuiTe. Schwartz. Lackey and
/ Peterson. voting against 1t
The report OF the committee on health
| and hospitals recommending thar the
/ city clerk be authorized 10 advertise
/ for bids and specifications for the cree
ton OF a garbage crematoTy on the