A Blackmail Scheme at the Statehouse?
Legislators suspect a proposed liquor licensing bill is less about temperance and more about extorting the state's saloon owners.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
A bill for the regulation of the sale of malt, spirituous and vinous liquors was introduced in the House by Representative Nevin of Skamania county. Its provisions are so severe as to amount to a practical prohibition of the liquor traffic in every town and city in the state, except those incorporated under a special act, and its phraseology are so ingenious as to testify the suspicion that it is a bold scheme of enterprising lobbyists to levy blackmail upon the liquor interest throughout the state. Section 2 fixes the amount of license per annum at $1,000. Every applicant must also obtain the signatures of an actual majority of the voters in the precinct. The bill contains a glaring discrepancy; it provides that applications shall be made to county courts, but there are no county courts in Washington, making the bill potentially inoperative.
“Its phraseology are so ingenious as to testify the suspicion that it is a bold scheme of enterprising lobbyists to levy blackmail.”
This 1891 report highlights the recurring tension between local control, revenue collection, and moral legislation. Much like modern debates over zoning and business licensing, the 'blackmail' suspicion points to how regulatory language is often weaponized by lobbyists to protect or exploit specific industries.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.