The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1912-03-22
80 PER CENT OF MICHIGAN
SALOONS WOULD BE PUT
OUT OF BUSINESS BY BILL
tcontinusd from page oas,.


Wild the state; that the amount of
each bond shall be $4,000 at cost OF
slO per thousand TO the saloonkeeper;
tEat the saloonkeeper may secure per.
sonal bonds. and that no company out.
.zfdsef Michigan Is eligible 10 write
saloon bonds.
The Field bill provides that all
saloon bonds must be personal bonds:
that the bondsmen must each be
worth the amount OF the bond In real
estate in the county in which the
saloon Is located. according 10 the as
sessment roll, exclusive OF exemptions,
and must reside I'm the city or town
In which the saloon Is located In
other words, IL a $4,000 bond were re-
quired, each bondsman would be COM
PEELED To be worth at least 81, 900 in
real estate, according TO the assess-
mentsroll, and billion dollars in
cash or government bonds would not
qualify him II he had but $4,499.9S
worth Of assessed real estate clear OF
membranes
The Knight bill opens wide the
rate To the admission OF surety bond
Ing companies from other states and
would put very kinky crimp In the
business OF the Michigan Bonding
company
In addressing the committee Attor-
ney Marsh argued that the Michigan
Bonding Co. had not made good In
the way of cutting out the objection
able saloon keepers, and that the only
times that 1t has acted for the eleva-
ton or the saloon business has been
in response TO a pressure OF public
sentiment and when II couldn't help x.
On the other hand, Attorney Blunt
Ing made the Michigan Bonding Co.
look not radically different from an
organization OF the Goo Coos" or a
w. c. I. u. auxiliary. He contended
that his company had put 400 or 800
bad saloons out of business, in that
it had the fellows who had been
tabooed card indexed and that they
couldn't get back in the business via
tho Michigan Bonding Co., and that
great precautions were taken against
permitting an undesirable man TO get
"a bond
He said that he believed the saloon
should be elevated and thought that
the curtailment OF the number and
making them live up to the law was
the solution of the liquor problem.
IN answer to the charge OF Attorney
Marsh that the Michigan Bonding
VINO held stock. a charge which was
substantiated by the reading OF the
names of some OF the stockholders.
Attorney Manchester said that when
the company was being formed he
Travelled over the state from Detroit
10 Ontonogan in an endeavor to get
bankers and business men to take the
stock, that he got some but not
enough and was compelled TO appeal
TO the brewers or fail in the attempt
TO form bonding company.
Attorney Bunting also took few
cracks at the knight bill, and held
that II that bill became operative, it
would result in the four or five hun
dred bad saloonkeepers down and
outed by the Michigan Bonding Co.
getting back in the business again
Attorney Marsh thinks the Field
bonding bill OF very much greater i'm.
portance from a moral standpoint
than the bill to prohibit brewery
owned saloons. He is more constrva-
tive than Attorney Bunting in his es-
innate of the number of saloonkeepers
that would be disbarred by this bill
and in. an interview, said he thought
it would reduce the number of saloons
as whole % per cent. This is rot
so alarming, for Michigan could pre-
sumably dispense with quarter OF
her booze bogs and still not be par
ticularly parched or OF the desert va
rfety.
Under the Field bill IL II became
law, saloonkeeper would have to
secure two bondsmen who owned
property free OF incumbrance equal
70 the amount of the bond which
ha
than $4,000. This might seem easy at
first blush but when It is considered
that the saloonkeeper or would.ce sa-
loonkeeper must secure men with the
inclination as we'll as the ability 10 be
bondsmen, the task is not exactly OF
the snap sort.
II isn't every man who has heaped
up clear and clean fortune of $1,000
10 $4,000 who cares to suffer the de-
gree of social tabootion and ostraclza-
ton that goes with being branded az
bonding accessory TO the liquor BUSH
ness aa,sasa "a isssas,e
And so. then, fromra moral and de-.
cency and dry" standpoint, this Field
bill is an alluring proposition in spite
OF the palpably exaggerated wet"
wall that IL would put 80 per cent or
the ssf0Ontsts out OF business.
Thes committee will probably re-
port the bill or bills out Monday
night when the house reconvenes, ac-
cording TO Chairman Ball, but that
gentleman was not prepared to pre-.
diet what the nature OF that report
would be. One man expressed the
opinion that both bills would be re:
ported without recommendation.
Can the Field bill be passed?
In the house-perhaps or possibly
In the senate-perhaps not or i'm.
probably.
II is more than likely That an ef-
fort will be made 10 amend II and TO
fin II so that II won't FIX the Michi-
gan Bonding Co.
Attorney Marsh says he would rath.
ct have the present law than tho
Knight law which would invite COM
petition and on this proposition the
extremely dry" and the ultra wet"
attorceys are agreed,
The house held short session Fri
day afternoon. and voted TO concur in
the senate resolution to adjourn when
a. did. adjourn until next Monday
evening at 3 o'clock.
The hearing on the bonding I'LL
n. a.