The Gambler’s Shield: How Seattle Saloon Keepers Dodged Mayor Moras’ Purge

When Mayor Moras called the Common Council to order at 8 o'clock sharp, all the councilmen's chains were tied with the exception of that made vacant at the last meeting by the resignation of J. F. McDonald, one of the members from the First Ward.

City Clerk Ferris had commenced reading the regular list of petitions and communications as the first order of business, when Councilman Dane moved that the body proceed for the election of a councilman to fill the vacancy. The motion prevailed and Councilman Burns proposed the name of Terence O'Brien as nominee. The nomination was seconded by Mr. [illegible] and one or two other members, and then came a pause. A 'grouse fight' had been predicted for the vacant place and the crowd that had gathered to watch the contest waited expectantly for other nominations to be made. They were all disappointed, however, for after a few minutes during which no other name was presented, the nominations were closed and the clerk was requested to cast the vote of the council for O'Brien, who was declared elected.

Mr. O'Brien was not present, and will not take his seat until next Friday evening. It is understood that he will assume the places held on the various committees by his predecessor. These are the chairmanships of the committee on sewers and water, and seats on the committees on highways and avenues, and streets and improvements.

Regarding the remarks made by Chief Justice Burke on the last day of the February term of court, concerning several saloons with being charged as gambling dens and urging upon the City Council the advisability of revoking the licenses of all saloons from which gamblers had been indicted or convicted, this was debated in the report of the committee on license and revenue, which subjoined:

To the Honorable the Mayor and Common Council of the City of Seattle:

Your committee on license and revenue, to whom was referred certified copies of proceedings had at the last term of the District Court of the Third Judicial district of Washington Territory, and in this city, against various persons indicted for the crime of gambling, and also a copy of the remarks of his honor, Chief Justice Burke, concerning the same, has to report as follows:

That, in view of the gravity of the subject, your committee endeavored to thoroughly and impartially consider the same, and we believe we have arrived at a right conclusion as to the duty of the Council in the premises.

His honor, the Chief Justice, suggests that the duty of the Council is to 'without further delay revoke the liquor licenses of every saloon keeper who is shown by the record of this term to have kept a gambling house in this city or to have permitted others to carry on gambling there.'

The record of the court shows that E. W. Way, licensee of the 'M. & N.' saloon, and H. C. Huntley, licensee of the 'Bank Exchange' saloon, were indicted, found guilty and fined by the court for the crime of gambling. The record also shows that the following persons, not being licensees themselves, were indicted, tried, found guilty and fined by the court for the crime of gambling in the several saloons named as under: F. H. Anderson, in the 'Orpheum' saloon; E. Myer, licensee; A. McLeod, and two other indictments, in the 'Esmond' saloon. Beede & Sinclair, licensees; Hank Carlton, under four indictments, in the 'Esmond' saloon. Frank Clancy was indicted under four indictments for gambling in his own saloon, and was given until the first day of next term to plead.

Your committee thinks that while the Common Council of the city of Seattle, as now constituted, concurs with all good citizens must, in the sentiments expressed by his honor, Judge Burke, with regard to the evils of gambling, we do not feel that the Council can lawfully or equitably, at this time or in these cases, follow out the line of action indicated by the Chief Justice.

Ordinance No. 110 governing the subject of liquor licenses provides in section 16 that at least five days' notice to appear and answer must be given to any person accused of a violation of the provisions of the ordinance before his license may be revoked. The Council cannot, therefore, take peremptory action.

It is the opinion of your committee that it would be both unjust and unwise for the Council to revoke the licenses of these persons at this time or until their several cases shall have been finally adjudicated by the supreme court.

There is another class of saloon keepers which his honor says ought to be deprived of their licenses. We refer to the cases of those in whose saloons the record shows that gambling had been carried on by others. Now, we think that while the record of the conviction of these other persons may be competent testimony as to the kind of house kept at such saloon, the keeper should be under trial before the Council for a contravention of the license ordinance... But this second class has also appealed from the findings of the district court, and their cases are set aside.

All of these cases have been tried under the Territorial code. But the city ordinance ought to be enforced by the police force, and ought to be sufficient for the purposes intended in its enactment.

Your committee therefore recommends that the chief of police and the city attorney turn their attention to sections 1 and 2 of division 3 of ordinance No. 800... Your committee therefore respectfully recommends that the Council defer any such action in these cases until such time as in justice to the accused and to the city of Seattle it can rightly take such action.

Dated March 14, 1890 R. K. BURKE, Chm. F. HERZK, JAMES M. O'NEILL.

The report was adopted without a dissenting voice.