Illinois Staats-Zeitung -- March 31, 1879A "Hornberger Shooting Affair"
[Translator's note: "Hornberger shooting affair" is a proverbial expression used of activities involving much noise and effort, but meagre results.]
Under the heading, "Tavernkeepers! Danger Confronts Us!" President John Feldkamp appealed to his associates yesterday by publishing an announcement in the Westen, asking the saloonkeepers to appear at a general meeting at the North Side Turner Hall, at one o'clock in the afternoon. It is now disclosed that Mr. Feldkamp called the assembly at the insistence of ten members, and one may well assume that the latter were all friends of Harrison (we could not ascertain their names) who were desirous of circumventing a prior resolution stipulating that the Wirthsverein (Tavernkeepers Association) should not take sides in the mayoral issue in the impending election; clearly, the ten gentlemen endeavored to use the Club's influence in the interests of Harrison or Dr. [Ernst] Schmidt, mayoral candidates.2
The inference is also justified when one considers the declaration in yesterday's paper [Westen], signed by Messrs. P. Mueller, L. Schwuchow, and Chr. Bruder, wherein certain questions are asked of the mayoral candidate Wright, and whereby he is requested to give a reply prior to the election. The text of the aforesaid questionnaire also accuses him [Wright] of being a temperance advocate at heart, and states that he discharged some of his men because they frequented a tavern contrary to his wishes.
One might have expected that Feldkamp's appeal, with its startling headline, would cause consternation among Chicago's tavernkeepers, and that they would appear in hordes at the Turner Hall to hear what new perils assail them. But the crowd did not materialize; one and one-half hours past opening time a small crowd gathered, barely sufficient in numbers to warrant opening of the portals.
John Feldkamp, in addressing the assembly, remarked that the meeting was 3called to consider ways and means to prevent the threatening victory of the temperance forces at the Springfield legislature, and that the ten members who requested that he [Feldcamp] publish the announcement would be able to explain the purpose of the meeting.
Feter Mueller declared the propaganda issued heretofore by the tavernkeepers had not helped much. The "drys" succeeded in submitting their temperance bills to the legal committees, which passed then, now the measures are before the legislature. One of the political Parties is responsible for this, and now the question arises, which organization [Democrats or Republicans] the tavern keepers will support at the election.
Mr. Langenhahn expressed the opinion that the problem had been discussed sufficiently before, and a decision given making it unnecessary to resume the argument. Baum declared the announcement did not explain adequately why the meetings was called. Marry Rubens [attorney], who is to represent the tavernkeepers in Springfield, was requested to give some information.4
Rubens explained that matters are not as unfavorable at Springfield as it appears, Mrs. Willard representative of the Women's Christian Temperance Union, succeeded in persuading the state legislative committee to accept will Which involves the license question; the bill provide that all women who are older than eighteen years are to be given the right to vote. But this bill has no chance of passing, because the best-informed members of the House declare the measure to be unconstitutional.
The other bill is a graver problem, because it stipulates that every two years, in all towns and election districts, an election may be held in which qualified voters of every ward may decide whether saloons shall or shall not be maintained within the district; there is no doubt that, if the measure becomes a law, several wards in Chicago will close the saloons within their confines. But it is not likely that this bill will be passed during the present session, since an attempt was made to bring the measure before the House and Hurry the acceptance, irrespective of routine order; 5but the scheme failed and it is very improbable that the matter can be acted upon before the Senate adjourns--even if the Legislature is favorably inclined.
Baum referred with ridicule to the smallness of the crowd in view of the impending danger announced in the notice, and remarked that, since the danger is but moderate, one might proceed with other business. The chairman, however, requested that the problem be settled first.
Schwuchow asked which party was responsible for the presentation of the temperance bill.
Rubens: "The Willard bill was submitted by Hinds, a Democrat. The following legislative committee members are inimically inclined: Black, (R.); Nast, (R.); Taylor, (R.); Peters, (R.); Trusdell, (D.). Our friends: Veile, (R.); Meyer, (Socialist); Provat, (D.); O' Malley, (D.); and Sniggs, (D.)"6
The two most inveterate "drys" of the committee are Black, the chairman, and Taylor, from Winnebaro County, both Republicans.
Mueller: "The Republican chairman of the House is responsible for the chairman and the members of the committees, and the Republican party for the chairman of the House."
Mr. George did not want the Association to expose itself to ridicule, and thinks that not enough members were present to pass resolutions. He did not defend the Republican members of the Legislature; even among the Democrats one finds very embittered prohibitionists.
Senator George White and Representative O'Malley were then invited to address the assembly. These gentlemen had come to attend the meeting, but the procedures probably proved too protracted, and so they had already departed. The incident was considered closed.7
P. Mueller then offered a resolution whereby the Governor is requested to accept the recommendations of the Cook County judges in regard to Henry A. Kaufmann, and to appoint him as Justice of the Peace, since Mr. Kaufmann always was able to combine liberal views with the law.
All present were in favor of Mr. Kaufmann. However, Mr. Rubens, as well as Messrs. Georg, Baum, and others, were opposed to the adoption of such a resolution, as it might prove harmful instead of beneficial, whereupon the resolution was withdrawn.
Schwuchow made a motion to reconsider the report of the campaign committee which was accepted, unread, at the last session.
The chairman considered the motion out of order, because the meeting was not called for that purpose, and therefore a reconsideration of a former resolution was not entertainable. Since no other matter was to be discussed, 8the meeting was adjourned. Lively arguments continued at the tavern of the Turner Hall.
I B 2, I F 1, I F 2, I K, II A 2, IV
Secondary listingsGerman // Attitudes > Politics > Voting as Blocs (I F 1) ?
German // Attitudes > Politics > Part Played by Social and Political Societies (I F 2) ?
German // Attitudes > Position of Women and Feminism (I K) ?
German // Contributions and Activities > Vocational > Industrial and Commercial (II A 2) ?
German // Representative Individuals (IV) ?
Your search criteria returned no results.