The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1904-07-07
assn overlook the fact that the Jap is
totally unacquainted with breakfast
foods that make brains and Drawn.
THE FREE LUNCH AGAIN

An ordinance is discussed once more
for prohibiting the serving of free
lunch in the saloons of st. Paul. The
reasons why the practice is objection
able are fully and cogently given. The
logic of them we believe to be unan-
swerable The fact that the free lunch
benefits nobody, and the saloonReeper
least of all, is established. But no.
body has yet pointed out what basis
this gives for appealing to public au-
thority and attempting to enlist the
power of the municipality in regulating
affairs which those most interested
should determine for themselves.
We object to this action on general
principles, and not because Of the par
ticular matter now in question. We
believe that everybody would gain by
the abolition of the free lunch; but we
also believe in the. adjustment of mat
tiers like this by private agreement and
private control, brought about by an
intelligent sense of private interest.
We disbelieve and we shall oppose the
continual extension of public and
statutory authority into the domain of
private life. We disbelieye in and shall
oppose the emasculating and enervat-
ing effect of throwing upon the public
authority more and more of the bur-
II f1.o rI1@
effort and initiative.
1t is agreed, we say, that the free
lunch is no advantage to the saloon. 1t
is stated by representatives of that in
terest that the free lunch draws an I'M
desirable class of trade. Well, then,
why not abolish it? Because, say some
of the saloonkeepers, while there is a
general agreement among them, there
is still a small element holding out and
refusing to abolish the free lunch In
their places. Why wait for them?
What harm can they do?
If the free lunch draws only unde-
sirable patronage, as we believe is the
case, it will go only to the places that
give the free lunch and injure them
alone. The other places will be re-
lieyed Of it and will lose only unde-
sirable patronage. Why should they
protest against such an arrangement?
Why should they not be satisfied to
give up for themselves something that
Injuries in the long run, and throw the
burden of it upon those foolish enough
to invite the consequences? Is there in
the situation a single element requiring
or permitting the application of the
compulsory power of law?
This is type of thousands of cases
in which the law is invited to act I'M
wisely and improperly. For heavens
sake, let us get away from the notion
Of universal regulation by nation, state
or city. Let US preserve something of
the free play of human forces and hui
man interests. Let us compel eccupa-
lions to stand on their own merits, and
to force the adoption Of right rules of
action by letting the consequences of
wrong modes fall upon the heads of the
foolish. Let us begin sometime and
somewhere to curtail the constantly
expanding sphere of legislative activ-
ity. There is not doubt that the sa-
loonkeepers of the town can Danish
free lunch whenever they wish to from
all reputable places. While it remains
in the others it can do no harm We
look with disfavor upon all the plans
OF this and of all other interests, trades
or occupations to compel the estab-
lishment by law of rules or practices
which they ought to be able to bring
about and to enforce among them
selves.