The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1910-12-21
THE AMENDED ORDINANCE.

We commend the action Of the city
council in its amendment of the liquor
ordinance. That ordinance as originally
passed was an excellent measure it
was approved by all the interests con
cerucd, as well as by the general pub
lie. There had been good deal OF
pressure and stress with regard 10 pro
hibition and TO the regulation Of sa
looms. The ordinance rs drafted was
hcid over during Inc session of tho Leg
slaturc of 1909 in order To- sec what
would come of the threatened prohibl-
tiou or other possible liquor legsla
ton. Nothing camc of it, and the ordi.
nance was theu put in the best possible
form and passed.
But although the ordinance was well
framed and well received, certain de
fects have been observed in its opera
ton. The adjustment of licenses as be
tween clubs, drug stores. restaurants,
and saloons, was not perfectly made.
The clubs have not been assessed Ii.
ccnses heretofore, and by reason of that
a number of bogus clubs have arisen,
whose only purpose is to cvado the pay
ment of the liquor license, and that
arc, IN fact. but little if any better
than dives And. then, there has been
reported good deal of liquor selling
in rooming houses and lodgings of va
rious kinds
The amendments passed upon by the
council on Monday night were designed
to cure these defects. We believe that
the solution arrived al by the council
viii bc generally approved, although
there is some doubt as to the exact ap
pication Of the amendments AS passed
with regard TO the drug stores How
ever. any defect of this kind can be
readily cured; and the council viii
doubtless take mp any question that
arises and deal with it effectively and
squarcly.
As The Tribune has pointed out. and
as all practical persons know. the Gle.
mont of good faith is the chief one in
all this business, and in all dealings
with the liquor traffic. Drug stores that
simply sell patent medicines or use
liquor solely in mixing a prescription
OF a physician. though they must pay
Federal special liquor tax for so do
ing, do not in any way come under
the classification of saloons. nor should
saloon license be cxactcd from them.
But the difficulty is, as statcd-tbc
question of good faith. DO they sell
liquor for drinks or not! If they
DO. then clearly they are liable to the
saloon license
AS 10 restaurants. ii is the same.
restaurant which, in good faith, would
serve wine or spirits simply as part of
Inc meal, obtaining it from a regularly
licensed retailer, might fairly hope to
escape the saloon license. But there.
again, tho element of good faith is in
volvcd, and if. AS the council believes,
many restaurants habituaIly sell liquor
simply as drinks. then clearly any res
taurant so doing should pay the license
the same as a saloon.
As TO clubs, the license imposed is
more in the nature of process Of regu
lation than an effort to derive revenue
on license as on saloon Hereto
fore the clubs have not paid liquor H.
ccnse TO the city: but they will. under
the new license. each pay S400 year
This the genuine clubs have expressed
Willingness TO do; and that willing
ness is commeudatory in them, for it.
allows the council TO prohibit the sale
of liquor by clubs that are simply liquor
clubs. AS this ordinance goes into eff
feet, those fake clubs will be put out
Of business.
And so we emphatically commend the
effort OF the council in This direction,