276 HISTORY OF PASADENA. 



However, it seems that the city marshal tried to do a Httle enforcing of 

 the law, after a five months' rest, for on September 15 and 17, 1890, he had 

 Thos. Twaits, a colored man known as " Cheap John," in court for violating 

 ordinance 125 — but the record does not show any penalty adjudged. And 

 there is no case again until January 3 and 5, 1891, a rest of four months, 

 when Geo. C. Monfort is in court on a similar charge. He plead guilty, 

 agreed to close his place or quit selling liquor there — and no penalty was 

 imposed. Then for five months the liquor sellers had a rest again. But in 

 June lightning struck them for the first time under the new regime ; and I 

 find in the police court records the following cases : 



June 10, 1891. Charles Berry — liquor selling. Fined $100. Paid. 



June g-io, 1891. Geo. B. Hogin, druggist — liquor selling. Sen- 

 tence suspended during good behavior. 



June 9-10, 1891. G. Aussen — liquor selling. Fined $100. Paid. 



June 9-13, 1891. Thomas Twaits — liquor selling. Fined $25. Paid. 



Then a six months' rest followed, till December 8, 1891, when Frank 

 Becker is fined $25 for liquor selling. And the next cases occur February 

 2, 1892, when Charles Berry is in court again for liquor selling, and depos- 

 ited $100 bail ; but the record fails to show anything further in regard to 

 this case. And Frank Becker is also in court again on the same charge ; 

 he plead guilty, and sentence was suspended during good behavior. 



The next step was taken by the city council on March 5, 1892, by the 

 enactment of Ordinance No. 195, which expressly provided that prohibition 

 '■''shall not apply to the sale of vinous or malt liquors at any hotels restaiirant, or 

 boarding house, when sold with and as a part of a regular meal.'" From this 

 time the records do not show any further attempt to suppress liquor selling 

 for more than a year. The city election occurred in April, and the liquor 

 men had it all their own way. Men were nominated who were in favor of 

 "high license," and there was no opposition ticket put into the field. So 

 the liquor sellers had a long rest from "persecution," and the violation of 

 the law went on more and more boldly. 



The city clerk's records of May 8, 1893, say: "Trustee Clarke called 

 the attention of the Board to the violation of Ordinance No. 195 by the pro- 

 prietors of most of the restaurants." Yet no action was taken upon the 

 matter. And I find in the records again the following : 



Junes, 1893. "Geo. A. Gibbs presented a petition signed by a large 

 number of citizens, asking that Ordinance No. 195 be enforced ; also called 

 the attention of the Board to alleged violations of said ordinance. Voted, 

 that petition be referred back to the petitioners, with the information that 

 the council were doing what they could to enforce the ordinance." 



Then, on June 19, Ordinance No. 220 was enacted, which provided 

 that prohibition shall not apply to sale of vinous or malt liquors "when 

 sold with and as a part of a regular meal costing not less than twejity ceiits 

 exclusive of the vinous or malt liquors, and sold and consumed between 

 the hours of 11:30 o'clock a. m., and 1:30 p. m., or between the hours of 

 5:30 p. m. and 7:30 p. m." 



