Year: 1866

the Statutes of the State. Good men
oppose this, and urge their objections,
and when we propose to discuss this
question, they say we misrepresent
them. Mr.. Trip last week urged many
objections against enforcing the State
laws, and that is all we said he did; and
yet he claims that he is inisrepresented.
Many of his objections are plausible,
such as delay, &C. But the very same
objections could be urged against the
enforcement of the laws against horse
stealing, counterfeiting, &c. The pres
ent liquor law has been on the statute
books for more than twelve years, and
several cases under it have been taken
to the Supreme Court of the State, and
the legal questions growing out of the
law have been we'll settled, and are un-
derstood by all lawyers. But our tenn
perance opponents say that the liquor
traffic in Jackson can be suppressed by
town Ordinance. If this can be done,
we are satisfied. But we have not a
particle Of faith in this plan. Let us
state our reasons for this want of faiih


In the first place, the present Mayor
is opposed to shutting up tipping hous-
es. He argued with us that there would
be more drunkenness to shut them up
than to leave them open-that men
would buy it in bottles and go out and
drink more than if permitted to drink
just what they desired, in the house.
The leading man Of the town council,
in a communication in the Standard last
week, over his own signiture, used this
language;


l am as good temperance man as you dare to
be, or any other man IN jackson.


Quite recently, fifteen good men Of
the county, upon their oaths as Grand
Jurors, said that this man had violated
the laws by selling liquor in the most
public place in the town, and this day
he is receiving rent for aroom which he
has rented for the purpose Of selling Ii
quor, and where it is daily sold in vio-
Iation of law. The town Marshal is no.
toriously keeping tippling house on
the most public corner in the place.
There has been an ordinance in force
for more than two years, ordering tip
pling houses shut up, and it has re-
NAMED dead letter. Now the friends
of the ordinance plan can see what they
will have to encounter at the outset.
The same objections as to delay, that
Mr.. Trip urges against the State law,
can be urged against the town plan.
Let us see The present Mayor says he
will enforce any ordinance that the
council may pass upon the subject.
We do not doubt but that he will try to
do so. He is a bold man, and does not
like to be thwarted in anything he uu-
dertakes. But how has he succeeded
heretofore in his attempts to enforce the
ordinances of the town? The council
passed an ordinance that it should be
unlawful to sell certain eatables in town
on certain days, without permit from
the Mayor. The Mayor saw this ordi-
nance violated, and he attempted to en-
force it, by imposing a nominal fine
He made oath in court that he did this
thing in good faith, and without malice.
Yet he was insulted and contemned in
his office, while in the discharge Of his
duties, and when he attempted to main-
tain some sort of self respect for his Of
fetal authority, the good people of Jack
son combined against him, and signed a
petition to the Sheriff, asking that Off
Ger to violate his oath, by setting the
authority of the Mayor at naught. The
Mayor has already responded to one suit
growing out of this matter, in which a
jury have said that he must pay three
hundred dollars damages, and vast
amount of costs, and there is still anoth.
er suit pending against him and the
Marshal, in which he will perhaps fare
no better. And it is we'll to bear in
mind what became of the fne and costs
imposed for the violation of this ordi-
nance. Whatever may be said about its
having been paid, the fact is, that it has
not been paid, but the case is yet pend
ing in the Common Pleas on error
The fine was imposed about the 7th ol
September, 1865, and the case cannot be
heard sooner than the middle of Octo
ber, 1866, and perhaps not then, and
good lawyers tell us that it is their opin'
ion that the whole thing will be re.
versed, and the costs will have to be
paid by the taxpayers of the Corpora,
ton, The Court decided that the Nav