The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1904-07-15
ALDERMEN REFUSE
TO ABOLISH LUNCHES
Committee Turns Down Ordi-
nance Designed to Remove
Free Food From Saloons =

An unfaYorable report upon the pro-
posed ordinance forbidding saloon
keepers to serve free lunches was
adopted yesterday afternoon by the
aidermanic committee on streets. The
motion to report adversely, made by
Aid. Corning, was seconded by. Aid.
'Bantzi and was, approved by Aid Mo-
sriafty and Rohland, the two other
members Of the committee then pres
ent.
: Mr.. Corning had said that "the coun-
Gil shouldn't undertake to run a mans
business Mr.. Bantz had conjectured
academlcally that, supposing he, as a
tailor, should decide to- spend several
hundred dollars a month advertising
his business, the city council should
not feel called upon to restrain his en-
;terprise.
: Corporation Attorney Michael ex-
pressed the opinion that an ordinance
prohibiting the serving of free lunches
would be of doubtful validity. 1t had
never been tested in. the courts. The
only towns, as far as he could learn,
that had adopted such a law were
Bloomington, ILL.,, and Minneapolis.
but if the ordinance was questioned
in court concluded the attorney, "the
result, [ imagine, would depend chiefly
{ on the disposition of that COURT The
/ committee smiled loudly.
/ Delegation Waited Outside.
While these proceedings were in
/ progress within the committee room
north of the council chamber the COM
nlittee could see, through the open
sdoor. long rows of wel1-dreSSed men
/ aligr1ing themselves along the benches
of oh
Gus strangers sat, in silence, respect
fully watching the vacant desks of the
{ city council.
I After the committee had disapproved
/ the anti-luneh ordinance and transact
ed other business, an emissary from
/ the silent walters appeared at the
door.
I'VE are members of the Retail LID
uor Dealers association, he explained
land We We're going to say something
sahout that. lunch ordinance. But we've
just: been told you voted against it."
'Oh, yes answered Aid. Bantz
I cheerily, 1--WE did. But if you gentle
men have anything to say, we don't
mind hearing it. In fact, we'd rather
hear it,
The committee went outside and
heard it.
Spoke. for the Delegation
/ w. J. Waldron, of the association,
spoke for the delegation. 1.-THE fact
|lis." he said, I'VE have been waiting
around here a, whole hour to meet the
committee. We thought they would
meet in the city clerks office. A ped
.dler can. come here and get what he
wants. But a saloonkeepef that pays
hundreds of times as much has to
| Skirmisi1 around.
/ This ordinance has. been railroaded
through. the wholesale liquor dealers
association and through. this commit
l. tee
Not through the comnfittee.@ pro-
tested Aid. Moriarty. I'VE took itl.up
lin regular order at O'clock in the reg
fular committee room.''
Is. But: Mr. Waldron thought the SalOon-
keepers ought to- see. the council next
| Tuesday evening before it voted on: the
lscommittee's report
List of Reasons Read
i Harry Sehulter had prepared a list
lsof. reasons why the committee should
ishave reported faworably. Said Mr..
IsSehulter reading his reasons: First,
free lunch was commercial and sam
itary nuisance; second, instead of con-
EStantly curtailing the saloon business
| why Shouldn t. lawmakers occasionally
| help the business out?s third. Minneapo-
| lis saloonkeepers were satisfied with
the abolition of lunches; tramps- and
l. iiUDOSSrOfGl1 lIlei6e IdtllOSG DOdTt.-
Ting houses; they had to so to work or
go to- ST Paul; fourth, without free
lunches saloonkeepers would have more
money for paying their bills; fifth,
| most saloon men favored the proposed
ordinance; sixth, food on a free lunch
! counter was handled more or less by
| the general public, the meat found
there would disgrace any butcher shop
and certainly would not stand the
lsscrutiny of the health department.
L AS the reasons were being advanced
another delegation filed in that would
/ gladly have arrived earlier. For them
1 George Wilson. contrixed to say, at.
1.-THE last minute, that they were the
/ Hotel and Restaurant Keepers Pro-
! teetiye association, and they were con-
3vineeda that free lunches We're a public
| evil. They would be glad to reassert
I this conviction when. the. anti-lunch
t.ordinances came before the board of al
i dermens next Tuesday evening,