The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1893-10-06
MANKATo FREE PRESS.
FRIDAY. OCTOBER 6, 1893.
EDITOR FREE PRESS

are of such nature UnaU TO De SllenG
now would be untrue. Hence, while
/ dislike public controversy l do not
want to drop this subject until l am
fully understood.
Referring to your quotation from
recent sermon of mine. the ReUiew
says:
1.-The substance of this charge is
that the saloon where White was ar
rested was open and selling liquor,
and that the chief permitted it to be
continued without arrest or protest"
Now what stated was in substance
nothing of the kind. l said:
"What sad comment on our low
state of morals was brought out in
the coroner's inquest, which was
held during the past week. The
chief of police enters saloon on Sun
daY to arrest man on suspicion,
while the saloonkeeper, who is open
" violating the law, is left to con-
tinue his Sabbath breaking without
arrest, and what is more, Wltnout
even protest from the officers OF the
law"
There is nothing in this to indicate
that the man was actually selling
liquor in the presence of the chief. l
know better than to make such
charge, for the man might swear that
he sold beef-tea or tomato-catsup.
All claim is that the saloon keeper
was openly violating the law, and the
law on this point reads:
1t shall be unlawful for any person
in any city, village, town or borough in
this state to SELL barter, furnish or
dispose of In any manner either dl-
rectly or Indirectly or by agent, en-
ploye or otherwise, any intoxicating
LIQUOR in any quantity or for any pur-
pose whatever on the Sabbath day, or
on any general or special election day,
and all places where the sale OF intoX-
icating liquors shall be licensed, under
the provisions of any law or ordinance,
shall be closed during all hours oJ eUeTg
Sabbath day and of every gen.
eral or special election day, and any
person violating any of the provisions
of this section shall be guilty OF
misdemeanor and on conviction there
of by any court having jurisdiction
shall be punished by fine not less
than thirty (3O) dollars nor more than
one hundred (1O0) dollars and costs of
prosecution, and by Imprisonment in
the county Jail not less than ten (1O)
days nor more than thirty (3O) days"
Chap. 81 Sec. l, 1887.
According to this law it is as much
violation to have the saloon open as
it is to sell liquor, and the law does
not make a distinction between the
front door or any other entrance, nor
does it make distinction between
saloon being open for business or
scrubbing or cleaning the bar fixtures.
The law simply says cit shall be clos
ed during all hours of every Sabbath
day."
Now even if l could not prove that
liquor was sold l claim that the law
was violated, but l can prove by
several witnesses that the man, who
was arrested at the time referred to-,
went to the saloon in order to.get a
drink of liquor on Sunday morning,
and that he confessed to having had
his thirst quenched before he under
took the alleged lawful SundaY-busi-
ness of scrubbing out the saloon.
The chief seems to have become
very Jealous of his official honor all at
once, and because he thought that ]
would be unable to prove my state
ment in this particular case, becomes
out with a card to the public calling
my remark libelous, and the Revieo
which in it's own words "has no sym
pathy with the spirit of fanaticlsn
and tyranny which burned witches
in the olden times, and now seeks tt
enforce a standard of morality tt
suit it's own whimsical tastes ant
fancies," consistently takes up TIT
case of this much abused officer anC
tries to divert the attention of thu
public from the real issue.
The charges as to selling liquor II
minors, gambling, and the genera
Sunday carousal in the saloon is en-
tirely overlooked.
If it be libel to say that one saloon
keeper was permitted to violate tn
law one Sunday morning, what will
they call the statement that, not one
but, all the saloons, with one or tw
exceptions, are permitted to violat
the law, not one Sunday, but ever
Sunday during the year. And tn
statement that gambling was openl
carried on last Sunday as l then stat
ed, and that several boys spent yester
day evening in saloon as | person
ally witnessed, and called the atten
tion of one of our efficient officers to
though he would not do anythin.
about it.
If the former statement was libel
suppose this must be treason.
The ReUieaC further says:
"How he can reconcile his position
with the further statement that MI
Yates is an efficient officer" or tina
he entertains personally The high
est regard" for him, we are at loss t.
understand. Public officials are a