The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1911-03-09
PL ANS ALL PREPARED FOR THE INVASION
OF MEXICO BY UNITED STATES SOLDIERS
NOT TO TEST THE
PROCTOR STATUTE
Attorney Robbins Rules Such
Test Cannot Be Made
for a Year.

The muddle into which the board of
county commissioners and saloonists
of the city have been forced as a
result of trying to solve the interpre-
suited in regard TO the new regulation
law. was not cleared up much on
hour the commissioners decided that
the ratio of saloons would be one to
every five hundred population.
Plans for a test case to be held in
the circuit court, in order to straight
en- out the entanglements. has been
abandoned for the present at least, be-
cause attorneys now say this is not
the proper time to conduct such test
and will not be until after the expira-
ton of licenses on the first renewal.
If such a test case is conducted to
determine the number of saloons
which may be operated in this city, it
will be filed year from now.
County Attorney John F. Robbins
holds that after a liquor license,
granted under the old law has been re-
newed once under the new law it can
not be renewed a second time, but
must come up as a new license. In
case it develops that his interpreta-
ton is correct. and it is found that,
according to the population ratio
clause in the law. Richmond can have
but forty-eight saloons, then four of
the present saloonists must discon-
tinue business after the expiration of
the licenses granted this year.
Five Licenses Issued.
|. At the February session of the COM
missioners, i've licenses were issued
under the old law. to Edward F. Cut
ter, Fourth and South ID streets; An
drew Wysong. Ia South Ninth street;
Frank NJ. Vessel, 40l South Fifth
street; William E. Bayfield,, Westcott
hotel; and Louis Knopf. Fifth and
Main streets. In February. 1912. these
FIVE men will ask that their present IL
censes be renewed under the Proctor
law, to expire in February, 1913. In
case all other saloonists now in the
city wish to continue in the business
in 1913, and it should be found then
that the city can have but forty light
saloons, then four of these five sa-
loonists will be forced to discontinue
Although this is the situation ac-
cording to Mr. Robbins's opinion there
are several other attorneys who in
terpret the law differently. These at
torneys claim that salOonistS now
holding licenses, can renew them each
succeeding year, so long as they COM
ply with the law. They say that even
! if Richmond had hundred saloons
or more. instead of fifty-two, that
these saloonists could get licenses
each year, despite the population
clause of the law. They say that the
! purpose of the law is not to force sa-
| loonists out of business. This is the
way the law is regarded by leaders OF
the Temperance element and perhaps
is the first time that the liquor deal
ers and the temperance element of
| the county have been in harmony.
| The commissioners determined on the
ratio of one saloon to five hundred
| population because such a ratio was
considered a very fair one to both
temperance and wet" elements. Fur
| thermore, such ratio permits the
largest possible revenue to the Coun.
ty and city. The commissioners had
been petitioned by approximately l.
600 men and women residents of the
county to make the ratio one saloon
to every one thousand inhabitants, the
minimum number under the Proctor
law.
Alphous Collett was given license
under the new law. II was first con
sidered to have remonstrance
/ brought against Collects application
! in order that a test case might be
made but the plan was found not TO
be feasible.