Amador ledger., 1904-07-22
THE LIQUOR LICENSE QUESTION


into effect next month. Saloon
keepers are taking the necessary
steps to comply with its provisions.
Petitions are being circulated by
the business men concerned, with
accompanying bonds, ready to be
presented to the supervisors at their
meeting next month The present
liquor ordinance is mainly rehash
of the previous one, except the
amending of the title, and the
onaissiiu.-vt tire -cfsuse- providing for
the publication of the application.
AS the time for the enforcement of
the ordinance draws near, its pro-
visions are being critically examined
. for the purpose of finding an open
ing to successfully contest it. The
license payers generally are as bit
terly opposed to the amended law as
they were to the previous enact
ment. They see in it nothing more
than an attempt to hamper them,
without the slightest compensating
advantages to the county treasury
or the public for the extra trouble
entailed upon them. AS matter OF
fact the treasury will lose by the
shutting up of bars in connection
with merchandise stores, where the
owners prefer to dispense with liquor
selling rather than submit to the
humiliation of packing round a petit
tion for signatures among neighbors
and hunting up bondsmen. The
idea of asking neighbors for per-
mission to engage in business is
CALLING to human pride. we have
been told that number of the class
referred to will not demean them
selves to that extent, and will quit.
They are the quietest and most
orderly places where the liquor sell
ing business is carried on. The re-
formers, who agitated for this ham,
pering ordinance, never contem-
plated the closing of these bars.
There is every reason to believe
that the ordinance will be contested
in the courts. It is claimed that it
is fatally defective, and cannot be
enforced Among the flaws detect
. ed we may mention that the ordin-
ance makes no provision for the dis
posal of the license money. Who
gets the license collections? The
sheriff collects, but it fails to state
what he shall do with the money
after it is collected. 1t nowhere
says that the license is a debt due
the county, and may be sued for as
any other Indebtedness. Must the
collector keep the whole amount in
his hands indefinitely? The infer
ence, in the absence of provision
that he pay it into the treasury, is
that it belongs to him. What can
be done with one refusing or neglect
ing to pay? Is Amador county in a
position to sue under the circum-
stances? No doubt test case will
be made as soon as the time is ripe
for such movement.
To the people of Jackson the mud
die again suggests the propriety of
the Incorporation of the town. That
business and property values should
be kept in a turmoil, and citizens
harrassed by the passage of crude
laws, without any apparent necessity
therefor, and upon the reeommenda-
tion mainly of non-residents having
no material interests at stake here,
is, to say the least, irritating We
contribute one third of the license
revenue of the county, and more
than third of the road fund of this
district. We are paying enough
through these taxes to sustain a
city government, which would give
US the privilege of managing such
matters in our own way. We are
denied that privilege. Why not in
corporate. and end this system of
bondage.