The Kimball graphic. (Kimball, Brule County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1883-1905, 1894-04-14
r.n.eso srory .so,rtcr.n..

Ever since the prohibition law went
into effect the city councils of this town
have been trying to scrape up some kind
of a revenue to take the place of the
thousand dollars or so annual revenue
received from the licensed saloons. That
the reyenu was lost was not through
any fault of theirs, and it was a laudable
undertaking, the replenishing OF tho de-
pleted municipal treasury. But with all
due regard to the various bodies OF mu-
nicipal solons in this town during the
past SIX years or so WI beg to differ with
them in reference to the best methods of
raising Il revenue from the drinking
places. The councils have, one and all
smut their eyes when walking past places
where beer and whisey was being sold
day after day andl hoped on the poor,
innocent vendors of pop and other light
drinks. The mar who sells a bottle or
two OF ginger ale Il day must pay the
same license fee as the man who sells IA
dray load of beer; and il he happens to
II a billiard or pool table to induce
custom for his soft drinks, they put it on
to him for that. Meanwhile, his trade
is cut into practically knoc ked into a
cooked hat by his competitors who sell
beer and whiskey. Anyone ought to see
the Injustice OF such adeal. Five dollars
a month $6Oa year is altogether too
heavy a penalty to put upon the sale Of
temperance drinks. As a matter of fact
the business should not be especially taxed
in any sum-neither should pool or bill
lard tables.
TO make bad matters worse, another
bill has been introduced in the council
raising the license o. temperance drinks
to $50 month-$2l0 year-and it has
passed its first reading. When it comes
to a vote OF it. it should be killed-kill6a
dead as a dried herring-and we think t
will be. OF course the object of the new
ordinance is to get more moneyout of Il e
saloons, but there is no earthly reason
for smashing the vendors of soft drinl
into the dirt in order TO get at those wi o
sell intoxicants-the latter OF whom, it
may lee explained, take out license for
the sale of temperance driilks--and nCY-
or sell any.
The GRAPHIC fully recognizes tile fact
that the council has no power to licerse
a saloon, but there is more than oae
way to skin a eat, and there is more than
u way 10 exact 4 reNcnu from the sale
OF liquors. What the council sllould do
Is 10 pass an ordinance fixing 4 fine OF
$50 or S25 Il month for keeping a Gis-
orderly house and designate a place
where Intoxicating liquors are sold as a
disorderly house. Then fine 'em every
month and have the whole proceedings
properly entered upon tile justice docket.
II is as simple as a. B. C. Other towns
all over the STATE are doing it-at Cham
b%erlain, at White Lake. at Armour and
all around us. BY this plan the goody-
good prohibitionists won't have a ft and
step i'll it-f0r there is no compromise
with climc"and the other more worldly
folk will think they are getting some
thing from the traffic pending a change
from the present very unsatisfactory
liquor laws.
What ii the saloons won't fork over:
Well. let the council pass such an ordi-
nance, andif the saloons don't come 10
time something II drop-and we'll bet
four dollars 1t won't he Mayor Foote.