The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-02-14
LIQUOR AND THE LAW
MIR. KLEIN TELLS WHY HE THINKS
THE NICHOLSON BILL is FAULTY.
Other Correspondents Discuss the
Measure from Various Points of
view and Urge Its Passage.

To the Editor of the Indianapolis Journal:
Please allow me few lines in regard to
the proposed Nicholson bill, which, if
passed, will be complete failure, as far
as enforcing the law is concerned, it will
be an inducement to cause more violations
than heretofore on account of the clause re-
voking the license. For example: In case
of violation of the law by licensed sa-
loon keeper, his fine would probably be $40
and costs, in addition to having his license
Gor which he pays 5000 revoked. This
would be total of Si20; on the other hand.
if a speak-easy saloon keeper is fined, his
fine total would be only $40 and costs. This
would be an inducement to conduct business
without license. which would bring about
a state of affairs unlocked for by legis-
lators and the speak-easies would flourish
by paying an occasional nominal fine,
which, at the expira tion of the year. would
not aggregate the amount of the license.
This, of course would encourage speak
eases. The better class of saloon keepers
are not opposed to the enforcement of the
laws, and willing to comply with the
same, providing the laws regulating the
same reasonable and all are put on
equal footing The clause to revoke license
would have the effect of closing saloons
during illegal hours. providing the laws
were amended that the unlicensed saloon
keeper would have to regulate his business
so as to come under the same heading IN
regard to screen and other laws as does the
one who pays license, and If every quart
house was compelled to take out corpora
ton license as IS done in Ill nois and Ohio.
with heavy penalty attached in case OF
failure to do so, speak-easy could exist
under the circumstances, and the laws in
general would be enforced and good results
obtained. This Is the opinion of VINO
has had considerable experience in the sa-
loon business GEO. l.. KLEIN.
Richmond, Ind. Feb II.
Thinks the Majority SlNuId Rule.
To the Editor of the Indianapolis Journal:
To-day I overheard conversation be.
tween two gentlemen, both of whom l
knew to be ardent Republicans. The topic
was one that is attracting considerable at
tention just now, viz, the Nicholson bill.
From the discussion, which became quite
animated, / gathered that one of the gentle
men heartily favored the measure, while
the other approved of the principle involved
with the exception of the local option fea-
ture, but opposed to the passage of the
bill by the present Legislatu I was not
surprised at his objection TO bnoxious
section" as he termed It, for known
other very good friends of the 4 to hold
the same opinion; although I have never
found anyone who could explain why a
community which has the right to decide
on every other matter of public interest
should be denied that right on the one SUBJ
ject Of liquor selling nor why a class of
men who pirate so ioudly against "sumptu-
airy laws should assume the monopoly III
that line, by forcing upon a community
waat the majority or that community do not
want. A strange paradox, lEdeed, in this
government of The people, that denies the
righ. of the majority. but then it may be
too much to expect consistency when il
clashes with seif-lnteresI.
But wyatt was his objection to the pas
sage of The bill? Why, simply this: that il
would be a breach or faith. "a breach of
faith2' Yes" How is that?' We'll,
you see, it's this way: when the State con-
vention was held we knew We had hard
fight before US. and when delegates came
with their pockets full OF resolutions on all
sorts of subjects we said: Now, nothing
concerning the liquor question must go In
toe platform, or We viii antagonize the Ger
man vote So the platform had no temper
ance plank, and gained overwhen-
ing victory. Now, to Keep faith with those
VINO helped win the light, we morally
bound not to attempt any legislation against
their interests.
Now. ! was surprised. IL was plain adj
mission that the liquor sellers as body
opposed TO the enforcement of the existing
laws relating 10 their business. Aside from
the local option feature, there is nothing IN
the bill as reported by the committee that
changes in the slightest degree the present
enactments regulating the traffic. The
Nicholson bill says. in effect. 'fhs public
suspects that the law is being broken in
many Instances, especially in the larger
cities. but owing TO methods employed TO
obtain secrecy IL IS extremely difficult to de-
! tect the violation, aud practically impossible