New-York tribune., 1903-03-22
HTOR EXCISE BILL.
a..-l,-e IT WI Better Saloon Con-
diti0Rs.
nv nrcREAsE OF REVENUE.


sAsrs Ia e strong sentiment among the oe'eeF
-. NJ citizens in favor OF the prOPoSe0 i.-
- IA the liquor tax IT'S "AS SuoeE
s #.s-.--rht out by series OF interviews win pi"'
- ,ran obtained yesterday. in which every
- - ,-as willing to express opinion for
4 . s,,..+sor mt only favored the bill on str1ctiS
- .rounds but declared that the revenue
81 - che state would be greatly Increased con-
s-srv 10 the favorite argument OF the hQooi
.sralers who are hgbsing the bill
/. - t,,d of ssIoonf which would be forced out
4 j. A,,.,,sSs would be no loss TO the community
A. snv x-av The Tribune's informants ssio' anu
,,nrauv the city would be better OF WITHOUT
-, vrnfI. the business which enabled them TO
rubxist going TO other liquor dealers Nou'u
s1,.re nav the increase in the cost OF the license
-. Rev Robert s Macarthur. pastor OF CAL
E~.-v Bsptist Church. expressed himself as
~4rnn1lx IN favor of the bill. He was unable 70
auaak fully on the subject. he said. because ne
1aA fzrst returned from q journey. ano mao oeen
urahIe to study the neas sure carefully bot'
ne continued all my prepossessions are in ia
war of the increase in the liquor tax. WouIo
rather SEE the price Of a license S2'oOo thah
81 200 for am in favor Of anything that WouIo
decrease the number Of saloons. as I'm sure
CHS measure would. I abhoT the liquor trannc
<oot and branch. hut / don't believe, because
ne cant have prohibition at once. that In the
mean time we should 90 nothing to regulate the
1ouor business, and think this increased tax
would result in driving out lot OF low orlnk-
xnr places. I do not believe that the States
revenue would be lessened.
..T have almost unbounded confidence in our
1ssyor and Governor. and should not dream OF
sefting I'D my own opinion against theirs. AS
TO places which would try to sell liquor IL
legally, the police should watch for them and
gF ha 1 don't see why
there need be any more under an Increased
license than there are at present Those sa-
loonkeepers VINO run respectable places
think would unite to shut out these ElesaI
drinking houses because Of the harm to their
own business; so there would be two forces, the
police and the respectable saloon owners. allied
axainst the Law breakers. Yes. favor this Dill
for three reasons: first, because 1t would lessen
the number OF saloons; second, because II would
tend to make the liquor traffic, evil at best
more decent and third. because as have the
greatest possible confidence in the patriotism
and true manhood OF Mayor Low and Governor
Odefl / can't believe they would advocate any
1hing opposed TO the States best interests
DR. Huntington Of Grace Church. said he
was heartily fr favor OF the proposed increase
in the liquor tax Il think II is an excellent
thing" he said "as anything would be that
would lessen the number Of saloons Even with
not be up TO the standard OF Massach chusetts."
The Rev DR. John B. Devins, who has been
largely engaged in East Side work, and has
fought the saloons there courageously. also
thought the increase would be for the welfare Of
the city because Of the low grogshops Il would
dIspIcre" 1T IS the brewers who fighting
this bill" continued Dr. Devins. 1t will pinch
them to pay S40O year more on each saloon
they control. but It will work for the benefit
Ao~v-
hAve fund, is not the corner saloon, where
people must go in openly. but the little ginmill
in the middle Of a block CT tenements. where
the woman can come down stairs, slip through
a side door unobserved, and get her liquor.
These are the saloons which the increase will
drive out. and, even IL we must have the big
corner saloon let US have the increased tax. by
all means You ask about the effect on the
State FUNDS? The income from licenses would
not be lessened Look at the millions OF dollars
increase resulting from the Raines law! The
same Legislators who put through the Raines
law are favoring this biII. and Governor Odell
is in favor Of H. too"
Robert Hunter. Of the University Settlement,
said that he favored the increase in the liquor
tax because saloons were q luxury, and luxuries
should be taxed highly they could stand
The increase would have material effect on
the number Of drinking places. he thought.
1he rev lnO1EaS IL SllCeT also Favored the
prr posed increase. because Of the number of
disreputable places it would force Of ex-
iEtence. Il haven't read the bill in detail" he
said. but favor just as nigh as can be
placed in justice 10 those who are keeping
honest places. / should heartily favor this bill
because fl would reduce the number OF saloons
and If there were anything which would reduce
the twelve thousand saloons in this city
&c half that number, l should favor It
still more. Regarding the State revenue
from this traffic. / hold that the only use
70 which license money should be put is to pay
for police protection. Il is a violation Of logic
20 apply that money for school purposes. Still
the income would not be lessened. / do not
think enough saloons would be forced out to
onset the additional receipts from the increased
tax Now, undoubtedly there would be ten
oency for man. If he wanted TO sell LIQUOR
and couldn't AFFORD TO buy q license, TO sell the
liquor Illegally; but the Excise Commission and
the Police Department should attend to such
places"
X Fulton Cutting was unwilling TO discuss the
excise question. but said that the Citizens Union
would soon take up that subject, not only re-
GaroinG the license fee, but from every aspect