The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1909-07-01
MARTINS ACTION
CAUSES COMMENT
Councilman Repudiates Agree
ment and Displays a One Hun
dred Dollar Bill.
LICENSE COMMITTEE HOLDS
UP MANY APPLICATIONS
Twenty-Four Liquor Dealers
Charged With Violating New
City Ordinance.


The license committee of the city
council presented a report to the coun-
ell as a whole at an adjourned meet
! ing held Wednesday night, recommend
ing the granting of saloon licenses TO
all retail liquor dealers now doing
business in Salt Lake City, with the
exception OF the following twenty
four:
Hanak & Rumph, 40 East First
| South street.
Kooregaard & Nelson 62 Commercial
street.
South.
Ren Hendrckson, 2l7 South West
Temple street.
R. a. Elmer. 27s South Main street.
Charles s. Swain, 81 West Third
South street
Guy Capuccio, 254 West South TEN
pie street
G. w. Wiunett. 1GS West South Tenl-
pie street.
Piccolo & Cerra, Sc East First
Rizzuto & Ruga, l49 South West
Temple.
Pappos & Kyrios, 553 West Second
South.
Nick Butkovich 12l South Third
| West.
South.
". Frank Conrad, l7e South Sixth
| West.
Pagliuso & Caro-, 14a West South
Temple.
BOMBING Bros. II Commercial street
Charles G.. Siudar, 40 West First
Nick Tedesco, l53 West Second
Walker & Biapco, 427 West Second
Bianco & Curran. 81 Commercial.
| L. H. Goulet. $40 South State.
| John A. Peters, % Commercial.
f. X Latulippe, 339 South state.
John Geren, 102 South West Tenn
ple.
Reniss in Compliance.
The refusal oe the committee TO rec
onimend the granting of licenses to the
| foregoing persons was explained by
! Chairman Stewart TO he based ou the
fact that after careful investigation
the committee was convinced that these
applicants had not complied with sec
ton OF the ordinance.
Section of the ordinance, which be
came effective on April Z. provides
al
the fixtures or OF the building in which
the business is TO be carried on. Tins
section was adopted by the council for
the purpose Of preventing brewerics
from engaging in the retail liquor busi-,
ness III large numbers 10 the detrlment
of the bona fide saloon owners. 1t was
known that not only in Salt Lake, but
throughout the country, brewers had!
established irresponsible persons III
business for the sole purpose of supply
ing Il market for their beer. In ma
icritv of these cases it is known that
such brewery-owned saloons were moth
ing short of dives and deadfalls that
caused the police department. more
trouble than all Of the other saloons
combined.
The committee found, or examina-
ton of the records of the county re
corder, that the title to the saloons fol
which licenses were denied were III the
name of the Salt Lake Brewing cont
pany, the a. Fisher Brewing company
and the WAGNER Brewing company.
bat that affidavits were made but
few days ago to show that there had
been transfer Of title. These Ic-
acknowledgements were all taken before
officers of the brewing companies ND
on their face were mere suoterTuc
1t was further learned that the bill
of sale were covered by mortgages
sideration that would justify the com
mittee in believing that the trsnsac
tions were bona fide. In fact, some OF
the saloonkeepers that made affidavits
were so ignorant OF the situation that
they did not know what the matter ali
meant, and it was determined that bo.
fore license be be go1onds,v gransed these
quired into.
Discussion in Council.
The matter was presented to the
discussion, but when put to vote al
present voted TO adopt the re-
port which was in fact the granting OF
i license 70 all the saloons Of the city
with the exception Of the twenty-foul
mentioned, but it was with the under
ned the license be given the right TIC
appear before the council TO establish
he ownership Of the fixtures or prop.
'rty with q view to securing favora.
,le, though belated action on their ap
'hcations. This hearing is to be be
,laces If they continue to do business,
vill be liable TO prosecution for selling
iquor without license.
Councilman Martin met with the IL
euse committee late Wednesday after
oon and Endorsed the decision OF the
ommlttee to withhold licenses appneo
or by the twenty -four. After leaving
hat meeting he is alleged to have got
nto communication with representa-
i've of one Of the breweries, appeared
O the council chamber few hours
iter, exhibited one hundred dollar
i'll, with a boastfu remark, and on
he floor of the council made en-
hattie protest against the committee g
ction. And, although he voted in the
ffirmativc he gave notice that he
-ould move to reconsider the vote on
lie adoption of the committee IS report
the next meeting.
1t was the most shameful and bare;