Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1904-08-03
THE DRUG STORE QUESTION.

/ that drug stores ana rcstauraHts 40 "A
| large business In the sale Of liquors,
under q comparatively light license, and
! they want II raised from $500 to $1,000 a
year, and demand that they be restrict
ed as to selling liquor on Sunday and
to women after p. m, and further ask
7 that II this cannot be done the liquor IL
cense for such places be repealed. This
matter Is to be Investigated by the
committees on municipal laws and IL
cense combined, and the parties
chiefly interested are 10 have the priyi-
iege OF appearing before that body.
This is a matter OF public Importance,
and It should be investigated with a
view TO the general welfare. The re-
spective rights OF the individuals and
firms engaged In the liquor traffic
should also be taken into fair consider
alton, Those who engage IN saloon
business ought to pay a saloon license.
In each case the violation OF city or
dinances should be followed by the in.
Fiction Of penalties provided. The ques-
tlon turns primarily on matters OF fact
Is II true that drug stores and restaur-
ants are doing business in the manner
alleged? II so, they are violating the
law, and complaints should be entered
against them. and on conviction they
should be punished according to the
measure OF their offence.
That appears TO US to be the most
consistent course to pursue. Drug stores
are permitted to sell liquors by meas
ure, under given restrictions, but they
are not allowed TO sell by the drink, as
saloons are. nor are they at liberty to
conduct n saloon business. We do not
think that they attempt to DO so, unless
It may be that they partially engage
in this traffic under the guise OF what
are called soft drinks" 1t Ia
claimed that anyone can OBJ
tain liquor mixed with tile refreshments
served at soda fountain, by indlcat-
ing what he wants In a manner UNI
derstood by the dispenser. 1t Is also
charged that ladies are frequently
served with such mixed drinks, and
that, too, sometimes without their
knowledge OF the nature OF the mix
ture.
II these allegations are true, tome-
thing should be done at once to stop
the evil, and also to protect the licensed
liquor dealer who carries on a business
made legitimate by law, for which he
pays heavy license. He ia further
restricted from doing business on Sun
day, and Is liable to a big fine II he
violates this restriction. The drug
store or soda fountain man, is permit
ted to sell his mild beverages on sun
day, and IL he engages in dispensing
liquor ON that day, he breaks the law
and gains q financial advantage over
the saloon keeper, which is unfair MS
well as antagonistlo TO the public in
terest.
The remedy for the evil, az we View
ST, f. not In raising the license rate but
in the enforcement OF the ordinance
against Sunday liquor selling in every
instance. Saloon keepers would not be
permitted to sell lntoxlcants on sun
day Il their license was increased and
the raising OF the liquor license for
drug stores would not meet the evil Of
Sunday liquor selling. no matter what
figure II should be placed at, Let the
ordinance in such case made and pro-
Wded be properly enforced, both on
Sundays and on week days, That is
what ought to be done.
As to selling drinks to women after
2 p. m, we do not think the point adj
vanced by the saloon men is well
taken, II would certainly be a grent
hardship 10 ladies TO be thrust out Of
drug store or other place where soft
drinks are sold, at the very times
when many Of them Indulge in that
kind Of refreshments Why should not
woman or young girl take a drink Of
soda water, at or O'clock IN the
evening las freely as In the morning or
afternoon? Az we have said, the ques-
tion turns on the facts IN the case. n
drug stores are selling liquor surrep-
titiously, they violate the law whether
they do so morning, noon or night. They
are not supposed TO sell liquor by the
drink at any hour and the proposed
restriction In reference to women and
given hour, is out OF place when
viewed IN the light Of the law.
As to restaurants, we do not see how
the proposition could be made to
work at all. II saloon business
Is really carried on by restaurant
certainly that place ought to pay
saloon license, But that privilege IL
not contemplated IN the reduced rate
required by the ordinance, nor do We
think II Is true that regular saloon
business Is transacted by restaurants
If they provide liquor for their patrons
on Sunday they should be liable to
prosecution the same as a saloon il,
hut this is rather a matter for police
investigation than for change OF H.
oense fees, The law against the sale Of
lntoNlcants on Sunday should be exc
euted in one case as well as in another
The city ordinance must be no respec-
Tor OF persons or places.
The appetite for intoxlcants Is evil
aenty Increasing, and It Is largely en-