Indians in Bars: Saskatchewan Liquor Laws after the Second World War

First Nations people were not allowed to drink in Saskatchewan bars until 1960 -- the same year they were granted the right to vote. This is the sixth in a series of posts on provincial liquor laws and their impact on small-town hotels.  NOTE:  The term  "Indian" is used in this post, as that was the word most commonly used to refer to First Nations peoples during the period under discussion.

Several thousand First Nations men and women fought in the Canadian armed services during the Second World War. When they returned from overseas, however, provisions from the out-dated Indian Act prohibited them from voting, holding pow-wows, and drinking alcoholic beverages. They were not even allowed to drink with their former comrades-in-arms at the Legion halls across Canada. In the words of James H. Gray, “there was something patently ridiculous in a system which permitted an Indian to risk his life for his country but denied him access to a bottle of beer.” ( James H. Gray, Bacchanalia Revisited’ Western Canada’s Boozy Skid to Social Disaster  [Saskatoon:  Western Producer Prairie Books, 1982], p. 117)

John Tootoosis. Image source

From 1946 to 1948, a Special Committee of the Senate and House of Commons studied the Indian Act and heard a large number of opinions on the issue of Indian alcohol restrictions in Canada. In May 1947 John B. Tootoosis, president of the Union of Saskatchewan Indians, told the hearings that there might be some problems, but, he maintained, “the Indian would learn to handle whiskey.” Joseph Dreaver, former president of the Saskatchewan Indian Association, claimed that “the sooner the Indian has same privilege as the white man it will be better for him.” Dreaver, a veteran of both world wars, told the committee that Aboriginal soldiers drank at in military canteens along with their non-Aboriginal comrades, and he “found no difference between the Indian and the white man.” (Canada. Parliament. Special Joint Committee of the Senate and the House of Commons Appointed to Examine and Consider the Indian Act, 9 May 1947,vol. 4, p. 1071)  

Joseph Dreaver (2nd from right), c. 1944. Image source

In 1951, on the recommendations of the Special Committee, the federal government made a number of changes to the Indian Act, including an amendment which permitted Indians to consume intoxicating beverages in licensed premises. The catch was that their provincial government had to take the initiative and petition the governor general-in-council. The Saskatchewan government was not prepared to act. Premier Tommy Douglas, a non-drinker himself, was not in favour of drinking whether by whites or Indians. He knew there was a divergence of opinion about drinking among Saskatchewan’s Indian leaders. “Local chiefs knew only too well the disastrous effects alcohol had had in the past,” F. Laurie Barron explains, “and understandably they were not anxious to legitimize or broaden its use.” Hotel owners in Saskatchewan were solidly opposed to opening their drinking establishments to Indians. According to Barron, they were afraid that drunken Indians might cause violence and drive away business. (F. Laurie Barron, Walking in Indian Moccasins: The Native Policies of Tommy Douglas and the CCF [Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1997], p. 110)

Nothing was done until 1960 when Douglas set aside his own reservations on the matter and petitioned the federal government to issue the necessary proclamation. The province’s Indians were given the right to buy and consume alcohol the same year they were granted the right to vote. The following year, the Hotel Association of Saskatchewan proposed that Indian drinking continue to be restricted until an education program could be implemented to teach Indians about their rights and responsibilities involved in alcohol consumption. 

John Tootoosis, president of the Federation of Saskatchewan Indians, informed the hotelmen that many educational meetings had been held on reserves throughout the province during 1960 that were designed to help Indians understand the complexities of the new regulations. Bill Wuttunee, a Regina lawyer and member of the provincial committee on minority groups, stated that while most Saskatchewan hotelmen were co-operating well, a few had “completely disregarded the civil liberties of Indians.” Wuttunee believed that Indians, given time, would be able to handle liquor as well as anyone else. CLICK HERE to read "Hotelmen’s Proposals Get Criticism from Some Groups,” Regina Leader-Post, May 17, 1961, p. 3.

Tommy Douglas, 1945. Image source

The following year, Premier Douglas addressed the 30^th annual convention of the provincial hotels association. He urged hotelmen to be patient in dealing with problems created by allowing Indians into licensed beverage rooms. “We are having this trouble,’ Douglas said, “because we are reaping the harvest of 50 years or more of making the Indian a second-class citizen. We are going to have to make up our minds whether we are going to keep the Indian bottled up in a sort of Canadian apartheid or whether we are going to let him become a good citizen.” He cautioned, however, that while the Indian had been given equal rights, he had no more right to break the law than the white man. “If he is drunk or causing a disturbance then he should be put out of the premises the same as a white man should. But he should not be put out just because he is an Indian.” CLICK HERE to read “Douglas Asks Patience in Dealing with Indians,” Regina Leader-Post, May 18, 1961, p. 42.

Racism in Hotels

It was not long before incidents of discrimination against Indians in Saskatchewan hotels began to occur. In May of 1963, for example, three First Nations people were charged with causing a disturbance when they were refused beer in the “white” half of the beverage room at the Edenwold hotel. Alfred G. Pfenning, the hotel owner, had introduced a “Saturday night rule” by which Indians were restricted to half of the planter-divided beverage room on Saturday nights. Two of the three people were fined $1, and charges were dropped against the third person. Provincial Magistrate L. F. Bence said the rule was unfair and bound to “rile” a normal person. The Criminal Code of Canada had sufficient provisions for dealing with rowdyism, he said. But to have restrictions based on a person’s race amounted to provocation. CLICK HERE to read “Segregation in Parlor Termed a Provocation,” Regina Leader-Post, May 24, 1963, p. 2.

Image source

In 1971, four Saskatchewan hotels were accused by the Federation of Saskatchewan Indians of discrimination under the Fair Accommodation Practices Act. Pubs in the Broadway Hotel at Leask, the King George Hotel at Kamsack, the Baldwin Hotel in Saskatoon, and a hotel in Prince Albert were alleged to have refused service to Indians. In the case of the Leask hotel, the beer parlor was divided into two areas, one with rugs and the other without. Indians patrons were not served if they sat in the portion with the rugs. An Indian woman said that she tried to sit in the white area three times and was told to move each time. At the Kamsack hotel, an Indian complainant said he walked into the white section of the bar and was told “we don’t serve your kind in here … you stink up the place.” 

In his letter demanding an investigation, FSI Chief David Ahenakew stated that while drinking might not be the most enlightened social endeavor, it was absolutely essential, “especially in such a milieu where defences are often lower and the cutting edge of racial tension more keenly felt,” that scrupulous attention should be paid to the basic civil rights of all Canadian citizens. CLICK HERE to read "Beer halls may face charges,” Regina Leader-Post, Jan. 6, 1971, p. 2.

Senator John B. Tootosis and David Ahenakew, c. 1975. Image source

Troubling Legacy

By the end of the 1970s, alcohol abuse was one of the biggest problems facing the First Nations peoples of Saskatchewan. CLICK HERE to read more. In 1978, Jim Sinclair, president of the Association of Metis and non-status Indians of Saskatchewan, stated that almost half of the natives in the province were “sick with booze,” and had severe alcohol problems. CLICK HERE to read “Alcohol Treatment Urged for Natives,” Saskatoon Star-Phoenix, July 20, 1978, p. 28. Things were so bad that Senator John Tootoosis, chairman of the Federation of Saskatchewan Indians' senate, stated in 1981 that he felt the reason the Canadian government had permitted Indians to drink in bars and buy alcohol was to allow them to kill themselves off. CLICK HERE to read "Fight for Rights, Indians Told," Regina Leader-Post, November 24, 1981, p. 4.

© Joan Champ 2011

Women-Only Beer Parlours: Saskatchewan Liquor Laws in the 1930s - Part 2

Getty Images, Retrofile, George Marks photograph

When the Saskatchewan government legalized the sale of beer by the glass in 1935, the question arose as to whether or not women should be allowed in beer parlours. In the end, after much debate in the legislature, Saskatchewan women were granted the right to drink beer – in separate women-only parlours.

Despite stereotypes about women as temperance advocates in the early 1900s, Saskatchewan women from many walks of life drank wine, beer and hard liquor at formal dinners, at weddings and at other gatherings. In the years since 1924, when the only places people could legally drink were in their own homes or in a hotel room, many married couples spent some of their leisure time together at home. Some might have shared a drink or two. As Craig Heron surmises in his book, Booze: A Distilled History (Toronto, 2003), “Inadvertently, government policy may have had [the] effect of breaking down the male near-monopoly on drinking and giving their wives easier access to the bottle that their husband brought home.” (p.288) In addition, the single women of Saskatchewan's cities and towns who worked as telephone operators and salesclerks, hotel chambermaids and restaurant workers, might want to enjoy a drink in their local hotel beer parlour after a day’s work. 

Getty Images, Retrofile, George Marks photograph

The thought of women in beer parlours was frowned upon by many, however. While Saskatchewan women had won the right to vote in 1916, this had not given them real equality. The prevailing conviction was that a woman’s proper role was as a wife, mother and homemaker. Many considered beer parlours to be morally compromised places frequented by morally suspect patrons. Women might drink beer at the expense of their children. Much worse, women might be lured into illicit sexual activity if they were allowed to drink beer in parlours.  

Male bonding. Source: www.oldstmaryspa.com

The issue was further complicated by the fact that a lot of men, including many hotel operators, workers and their customers, simply did not want women in what was considered male social space. Hotelmen feared that the presence of women might curtail the consumption of beer. Male camaraderie might be inhibited. Charles Hurt of Vernon, B.C. gave voice to these qualms when he said, “Certainly there are many men who cannot be happy unless they are telling or listening to lewd stories or punctuating their conversation with a series of oaths, and such men do, no doubt, find their liberty of action circumscribed by the presence of ladies in the parlor.” (Quoted in Robert A. Campbell, Sit Down and Drink Your Beer; Vancouver’s Beer Parlours, 1925-1954, University of Toronto Press, 2001, p. 56) Many females agreed that a beer parlour was not a place for women. In the 1930s, most women were too busy running the family household to visit a beer parlour. Few could even afford it, given the hard times of the Depression. Some women, however, wanted in.

For several weeks in January 1935, members of the legislature debated the new liquor act and regulations. They received representaitons from both the Saskatchewan Moderation League and the Saskatchewan Temperance League asking for beer parlour privileges for women. According to the Regina newspaper, temperance advocates argued that since men and women voted together in the 1934 beer-by-the-glass plebiscite, they should be allowed to drink together. Premier James G. Gardiner said he was opposed to parlours for women because he believed that two thirds of the women in the province did not want beer at all. “He said he had been besieged by resolutions and letters from women’s organizations and individuals opposing beer parlors,” the paper reported, “but hadn’t received a single letter from any woman asking for them.” (Regina Leader-Post, Jan. 11, 1935, p. 3 and Jan. 19, 1935, p. 1).

Nevertheless, on January 22, 1935, the legislature approved separate, women-only beer parlours for all communities in the province. In cities, there had to be separate entrances for, and no means of communication between, the men’s and women’s parlours. In smaller centres, there could be a single entrance, but separate parlours. Omer Demers, MLA for Shellbrook, condemned the whole concept. “The very fact that we are not going to allow men and women to drink together is nothing short of an admission that the beer parlor is not going to be a decent place to go,” Demers said. (Regina Leader-Post, Jan. 22, 1935, p. 8)

Reaction to the establishment of women-only beer parlours was swift. “Fancy any real woman lowering her dignity by visiting such places,” wrote James Smith of Regina in a letter to the newspaper, “especially those who have the care and training of our future citizens.” S.G. Jamieson, on the other hand, thought that men and women should be allowed to drink together. His letter to the editor stated,“I would much sooner see my family drinking together in a public place than to … sneak off in a place where they practically have to hide to drink.” (Regina Leader-Post, Feb 7, 1935, p. 4) Perhaps the most interesting analysis of Saskatchewan’s new beer law came in an editorial by the Vancouver Province, quoted in the Leader-Post on March 21,1935:

The New York Times … hears about our new Saskatchewan beer law and doesn’t know what to make of us all. … In an age of sexual equality, the women of Saskatchewan are to have their beer-by-the-glass licensed houses, as well as the men of Saskatchewan. Even in the same house, but not in the same chaste parlor. Oh, no. No man except a beer waiter may be lawfully in a women’s beer parlor in the new Saskatchewan beer dispensation. And no woman may be lawfully in a man’s beer parlor. … separate compartments (beer-tight partitions, say), and there may not even be communicating doors… . They fought over these regulations for a whole week in the Saskatchewan House, before the beer separatists won. One member said, suppose a man and his wife dropped into a beer parlor together, wanting to have a thoughtful and connubial beer together, and then found they must go their separate ways, sundered by this harsh, estranging partition, drinking their lonely and uninspiring beer-by-the-glass, he on his side of the partition, she on hers, so that those whom God had joined together had been put asunder by the beer laws of Saskatchewan – how about it, what then? And the Saskatchewan House said, all right, what about it: it would just be too bad for them. 

All of this consternation was irrelevant, however. In March 1935, Regina hotelmen announced that they had decided not to provide separate beer parlors for women. It appears that the rest of the hotels in the province followed suit. Women would have to wait until 1960 to enter Saskatchewan’s beer parlours – or beverage rooms as they became known – through the “Ladies and Escorts” door.

© Joan Champ 2011

Beer by the Glass: Saskatchewan Liquor Laws in the 1930s - Part 1

During Prohibition, too many people in Saskatchewan were drinking illegally, thanks to a proliferation of stills and home brew. Prohibition had also contributed to a marked increase in crime and violence. The new slogan became “Moderation.” In 1924, the Saskatchewan government repealed Prohibition, established the provincial liquor board, and implemented a new system of severe liquor control designed to limit alcohol consumption. 

Highly restrictive liquor regulations did not help to improve business at Saskatchewan’s hotels. For one thing, the Saskatchewan Liquor Act of 1924 did not allow the sale of beer by the glass in licensed premises. Hard liquor, beer and wine had to be purchased from government stores. There were only two places that people were allowed to drink: in their own home or in a hotel room in which they were registered. Nightly drinking parties took place in hotels, to the great annoyance of owners and other guests. 

W.W. Champ.  Family collection

W. W. (Wes) Champ, President of the Saskatchewan Hotels Association (SHA) in 1925, highlighted the problems this situation created for hotel owners.“While the liquor stores sell the desired drink and secure the profit, the onus is unpleasantly placed on the hotelmen of providing the room wherein the liquor may be consumed," Champ wrote in a statement to the press. "This is undoubtedly a complaint on the part of the hotelmen of the province that deserves the serious consideration and sympathy of all those who desire a healthy, sober community surrounded by well-kept hotel establishments.” The SHA circulated a petition in 1928 asking for legislation permitting beer parlours, or at least a plebiscite to determine the will of the electorate, and got 70,000 signatures. Premier James. G. Gardiner’s government denied the petition. (H.G. Bowley, A Half Century of Hospitality; The Story of the Hotels Association of Saskatchewan, 1906-1956, Regina, 1957)

When the Depression hit in 1929, Saskatchewan’s hotels drifted into debt and decline. As the Depression deepened in the 1930s, hotel keepers, like everyone else in the province, struggled to scrape by. They were unable to replace deteriorating furniture and equipment, or to renovate their shabby premises. Often, taxes went unpaid. Then, in 1935, the government finally introduced the sale of beer by the glass, providing a welcome source of revenue and some relief for the hotel business. 

Saskatchewan Hotel Association ad in the Regina Leader-Post, June 16, 1934.

 

Temperance ad in the Regina Leader-Post, June 16, 1934.

The SHA had managed to achieve this major concession from Premier J.T.M. Anderson’s government in 1934. A plebiscite was held during the provincial election in June which asked the question: “Are you in favor of the sale of beer by the glass in licensed premises?” A large front-page newspaper ad was placed by the SHA stating that “Bootlegging, Law Breaking, Secret Drinking, Respect for the Law, Increased Revenue for the Government – which can be accomplished by voting for the Sale of Beer on Licensed Premises.” An advertisement by the Moderation League of Saskatchewan stated, “If you have the interest of the youth of the Province at heart, vote for the sale of beer by the glass.” The plebiscite carried by 30,130 votes. The final count was: Yes - 191,722; No - 161,592. Half the majority was from Regina and Saskatoon; many rural areas voted against it. (Regina Leader-Post, June 28, 1934, p.1)

Forbidden to Sell Anything But Beer
 
The government wrestled for weeks with the framing of the new liquor act and resolutions. In the end, the rules established for beer parlours seemed designed to make them as unattractive as possible. Customers could drink only while seated, unlike in the old-time taverns. They could not carry their drinks between tables. On January 22, 1935, Omer Demers, MLA for Shellbrook, pointed out to the Legislature that, “We used to stand up and drink and when we had enough we knew enough to leave. Now we sit down and don’t know when we’ve had enough.” (Regina Leader-Post, Jan. 22, 1935, p.8) There could be no meals or sale of food, no sale of soft drinks, no dancing, no musical instruments, no playing cards, no slot machines, and no entertainment of any kind in beer parlours. The only thing they could sell in these cheerless places was beer. Women could neither work in, nor patronize, the province's beer parlours [see separate blog post]. Liquor board inspectors were sent out to watch for violations. 

By April, hundreds of Saskatchewan hotels were applying for liquor licenses. The SHA said that, out of its 480 members, 80 – mainly Chinese hotel owners – would not be able to qualify. (Regina Leader-Post, Mar. 12, 1935, p. 1) Chinese were excluded because the law required that the applicant for a liquor license had to be a person who was entitled to vote. The Chinese in Saskatchewan did not receive the provincial franchise until 1947.

New beer parlour at the Maymont Hotel, c.1935.  From Sod to Solar (1980)

"Spigots spouted suds in 22 Saskatchewan hotels on Thursday [May 2, 1935], and draft beer became legal again for the first time in 20 years," the Regina newspaper stated."Not since 1915 has beer by the glass been legal in a public way in this province." (Leader-Post, May 2, 1935, p. 1) 

In order to take advantage of this new turn of events, hotels had to spend money to build or fix up their beer parlours. The government had set rigorous architectural standards before licenses would be issued to sell beer. Only hotels that had a minimum number of guest rooms and adequate dining rooms for guests could be licensed. Most of the hotel keepers went further into debt, but it was hoped that, with the added revenue, they would be able to carry on. 

Local Option Vote

A big obstacle for many small-town hotels was the question of “local option.” The new legislation

Saskatoon Star-Phoenix, November 21, 1935

passed on January 22, 1935, allowed communities to vote on whether or not they wanted a beer parlour in their local hotel. In Carlyle, controversy raged for weeks over whether or not Jim Anderson should be allowed to apply for a beer parlour license for the Arlington Hotel. In the end, 123 voted Yes and only 7 voted No. “One old timer chuckled [that] he couldn’t find one solitary person who admitted to a ‘yes’ vote so he could never figure out where the majority came from,” the Carlyle history records (Prairie Trails to Blacktop Carlyle and District, 1882-1982). Redvers was one of the few towns that defeated the local option vote. The hotel closed, and the owner had to wait three years before he could reapply for a license. In 1939, the town voted in favour of a license, and, with the revenue from the beer parlour, the Redvers Hotel was able to start making improvements and upgrading its facilities. (Redvers, 75 Years Live, 1980) Saskatchewan’s hotel industry did not fully recover, however, until the return of better economic conditions after the start of the Second World War. 

© Joan Champ 2011

Prohibition: Hotel Bars Close Their Doors

From July 1, 1915 to 1924, Saskatchewan was dry. With the closure of 406 bars, 38 liquor dealers, and 12 clubs, it was estimated that liquor consumption in the province dropped by ninety percent. The number of convictions for drunkenness dropped from 2,970 cases in 1913 to 434 in 1918. When the bars closed down, however, so did many small-town hotels. “The hotelmen knew that without beverage revenue they could hardly hope to make ends meet,” writes H. G. Bowley in his 1957 history of the Hotels Association of Saskatchewan. “One of the cornerstones of the art of hospitality was to be removed, and they knew the whole structure of their industry would inevitably totter, and perhaps crash.” Indeed, hotels values in the province plummeted. Many hotel businesses never fully recovered from the blow of 1915. It may not be a coincidence that so many hotels burned down during the Prohibition years. 

The Lafrenieres. Footsteps in Time: Meota  (1980)

The last days of June 1915 before Prohibition came into effect were hectic ones for small-town Saskatchewan hotels. Prior to the closing of the bars on the July 1^st deadline, hotel owners were faced with the necessity of disposing of their stocks. There was a great rush to purchase liquor. At the Clarendon Hotel in Gull Lake, “more than one kerosene can, brought to town to be filled with coal oil, found its way home filled with liquid other than coal oil,” the town history (1989) reports. “Rye whiskey sold that afternoon of June 30^th at $1.00 per gallon and some sizeable stocks were laid in against the drought.”  That same day at the King Edward Hotel in Meota, Edward and Ferris Ann Lafreniere recalled that, prior to closing, “Anxious buyers filled the bar pushing and shoving. Money was thrown and bottles snatched in return. The doors finally closed and Ed and Ferris Ann literally swept the money from the floor with broom and dust pan. The following day the law moved in and destroyed the remaining stocks.” 

Closure and arson weren’t the only coping strategies used by Saskatchewan hotel owners when Prohibition hit. Charles Hitts sold the hotel at Griffin. “When the liquor licenses were rescinded it was hard to keep the commercial travelers over the weekends in the small places,” Griffin historian Mable Charlton writes (1967). “Although the menus were as good they went on to bigger places where there was more amusement.” The owner of the Imperial Hotel at Frobisher, John Klaholz, approached the town council in 1920 requesting that the sales of soft drinks, cigars and cigarettes be confined to the hotel to help make it pay – otherwise, he said, he would have to close it. Some hotel owners applied for government grants for the maintenance of public restrooms and reading rooms in their establishments. Unable to operate profitably, the Last Mountain Hotel at Strasbourg established a movie theatre on the second floor. Ice cream parlours often took the place of hotel bars. In 1916, F. A. Wright got a license to operate five pool tables in the Commercial Hotel in Herbert. Two years later, the Commercial Hotel was destroyed by fire.

Bootleg operations flourished in small-town Saskatchewan hotels during Prohibition. The thirsty traveler staying at the Arlington Hotel at Maryfield was usually able to satisfy his wants through the good graces of John Dodds, the proprietor. Dodds was caught on at least two occasions by a provincial liquor inspector, and paid the appropriate fines for his indiscretion. 

The Wilkie local history book provides the following account of a suspected bootlegging case at the Empire Hotel. On August 17, 1915, the Royal North West Mounted raided the hotel between 10 a.m. and noon. “In room No. 6, which was occupied by the hotel proprietor [W.H. Smith] and his wife, after a vigorous search was made, 28 bottles of liquor of various descriptions were found, the contents of two of which had been partially consumed. Upon being asked how this exceptionally large ‘private’ stock came to be on the premises, the defendant, during the hearing before Mr. T. A. Dinsley, J. P., stated that she had taken this liquor from the hotel cellars prior to the date upon which intoxicants had to be removed from the premises, July 1^st, and had secreted the bottles, unknown to her husband, in her trunk in which they were found. ... The room in which the liquor was found had been occupied exclusively as a private living room during the entire period that her husband had been proprietor of the house and that it had never been used as a guest chamber. … When the police commenced to search the trunk she told them that it only contained linen. When asked why she made this statement, she could give no reason. When asked why she had kept her husband in ignorance of the fact that she had a private stock she stated that had he known he would probably not have allowed her to retain it.” Verdict: Not guilty.

© Joan Champ, 2011

Saskatchewan’s Hotel Bars Before Prohibition

Bar at the Fielding Hotel, 1915.  Glenbow Archives, NA-3853-23

"You have to be a certain type of person to look after a bar in a hotel, as you meet all kinds of people under the influence of liquor.”

     - Irene Lessard, Baldwinton Hotel

The hotel bar was a busy place in small-town Saskatchewan in the early 1900s. The Legislative Assembly of the North West Territories passed the Liquor License Ordinance of 1892.  For about $200, hotels could obtain a license which allowed them to sell liquor by the glass at the bar, as well as off-sale liquor (by which bottles could be taken out of the premises).   

License for the Beaver Hotel at Denholm, 1914.

From Western Development Museum,

WDM-1973-NB-5524

The typical Saskatchewan hotel in 1910 had a long, ornate wooden bar complete with a large mirror behind it, brass foot rails, and brass spittoons.  A sign over the beverage room door read, “Licensed to sell spirituous or fermented liquors.” These were stand-up bars for men only – there were no chairs. Over the bar, the bartender served lager beer, wine, brandy and gin, as well as soft drinks.  Whiskey sold for ten cents a glass.  

W. Laing behind the bar of the Grand Hotel at Moosomin, c. 1905.

From Moosomin Century One: Town and Country (1981)

 The hotel bars did a roaring trade. According to the Pense local history book (1982), the Carlton Hotel was built at a cost of about $48,000, and the original owner made $25,000 in a single year. “It had 30 rooms and for several years after it was built it was full every day. It also had a large bar, which on one picnic day sold $1,000 worth of liquor, the liquor being purchased by the carload.” The hotel at MacNutt stayed open on sports days. “It was on days such as this that we usually sold 500 to 600 bottles of liquor in one day,” Philip Schappert, the hotel bartender recalled.   

Prud'homme Hotel bar, n.d. Owner Joseph Marcotte on right.  Glenbow Archives, NA-3853-33

Things really got hopping on Saturdays.  Farmers who had to haul their grain for many miles stopped into the hotel to eat and quench their thirst after a hot and dusty journey “With families dispersed into the country stores to shop, visit friends, and exchange gossip,” James Gray writes in Booze (1974), “the farmers had the opportunity [to slip away for a drink] if they had the urge.” There were a few fights on Saturday nights at the hotels in those days.  T. L. Ferris described the scene for the Fielding history book (1984). “A Saturday night was quite different from anything you might see today,” he recalled. “There were no street lights in those days and only the hanging light on the wide north porch lit up the entrance to the bar. We’d see noisy drunks come reeling out and many a fight livened up our evenings.” A story is told about the North-West Hotel in Ceylon owned by William J. Coffron of a certain Irishman who had a few too many drinks and wanted to cause a disturbance. “Mr. Coffron got him upstairs and handcuffed him to the bedstead,” the Ceylon history book records (1980). “Before long, he was coming down the stairs carrying the bedstead with him.” At the Strasbourg Hotel, rumour had it that a fellow rode his horse in and shot up the bar.  Subsequent owners maintain that the bullets are still in the wall.  

Parkside Hotel bar, c. 1910.  From Follow the Spirit (1980)

Concern about the high rate of alcohol consumption led to the appearance of Women’s Christian Temperance Union (WCTU) in Saskatchewan. Its primary objective was to combat the evils of whiskey. Pressure from the WCTU and the Banish-the-Bar movement resulted in an announcement by Premier Walter Scott in March, 1915 that all bars in Saskatchewan would be closed as of July 1, 1915.

© Joan Champ, 2011