folks.  having read an enormous volume of san francisco newspapers from the
mid-19th century on, i can say for certain that drunken horseback riders
were occasionally arrested in sf and outlying communities.  i don't know
whether there were ordinances against such behavior specifically, but i
doubt it.  the public drunkenness laws were sufficiently broad that more
precise legislation would not have been necessary.  i don't have this
category indexed in my notes or i would find an instance to relate.  if
evidence is vital to someone, and it can wait until the summer, i will
conduct a search.  jb


At 04:07 PM 02/13/2000 -0800, you wrote:
>Hi Rod...
>
>1,  Tracy Cameron's (1977) earliest reference to the "drunk driving
>problem" was:
>
>"Motor Wagons," 1904, (Editorial) _Quarterly Journal Inebriety_ 26, pp.
>308-309.  Reprinted in _Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol_, Suppl. 4,
>May, 1968, opposite p. 1.
>
>It's short but it may touch on the transition from horse-drawn to
>automotive transport.
>
>2.  I have a limited library here in Wallace, but I checked two or three
>books for mentions of
>drunken equine driving.  No luck.  Richard Erdoes (_Saloons of the Old
>West_, New York: Alfred A.Knopf, 1979) writes delightfully about some other
>kinds of intersections between the horse and
>drinking/drunkenness though:
>
>p. 17 (and regarding colonial taverns):  "Most innkeepers brought a stirrup
>cup on a tray to a horseman in a hurry who did not wish to dismount--an
>early example of 'drive-in' refreshment."
>
>p. 46 (and regarding old west saloons):  "Next to or behind the saloon was
>usually a livery barn.  Sometimes a cowhand with too much of a load on
>would forget all about his horse, leaving it tied to the rail while
>staggering off for his ranch on foot.  Some of his pals would check the
>brand of his pony and turn it loose.  The smart and sober animal would go
>straight home, usually overtaking its rider on the way.  Some customers had
>an arrangement with the stable next door to take care of their horses if
>they intended to go on a drunk of more than a day.  The town's sheriff
>could read brands jus as easily as a modern city cop can read license
>plates, and he would take care of the 'parking' problem if he saw a horse
>tied to the rack overnight."
>
>See pp. 217-218 for horses invited INTO bars by their drunken owners.
>
>Ron
>
>----------
>From: Roderick Phillips <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Drinking and driving
>Date: Sunday, February 13, 2000 2:03 PM
>
>From: Rod Phillips, History, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada
>[log in to unmask]
>
>RE; DRINKING AND DRIVING
>
>I can't add much substance to this very interesting discussion, but I
>have a question and a couple of observations.
>
>My question is whether there were regulations against drinking and riding
>a horse or driving a horse-drawn carriage/cart. I don't mean
>regulations covering unsafe driving, where being drunk would
>contribute to a violation, but I'm wondering about laws that refer
>specifically to alcohol.
>
>The reason I ask is that so much of the early automobile culture drew from
>what we might call the equine model. I recall from some research I did
>long ago on the first introduction of "horseless carriages" to New Zealand
>(in, I think, 1897) that the regulations, maximum speeds, and so on, were
>based on the prevailing behaviour and experience with horse-drawn vehicles.
>
>If there was no law against being in charge of a horse while under the
>influence of alcohol, the introduction of drinking and driving laws would
>have been that much more an innovation and, one might expect, would have
>taken that much longer to introduce.
>
>My first observation is that attitudes toward drinking and driving have to
>be seen not only in terms of attitudes toward alcohol, but also attitudes
>toward driving.  Historically there's been a tendency to minimise driver
>responsibility for damage, injury, and death.  It's significant that we
>use the word "accident" to refer to events that are generally avoidable,
>and that penalties for offenses with serious consequences have until
>recently been very light in many places.
>
>Second, and to pick up the point made by Ron Roizen, drink-driving laws do
>in part depend on the ability to measure alcohol levels. Even so, until
>recently many jurisdictions have used impressionistic evidence.  I recall
>that when I was a reporter in a small Ontario town in the late 1960s, one
>of the least-sought-after assignments was covering Monday's court session,
>when the weekend's alcohol offenders appeared before the magistrate.
>Apart from the sad procession of regulars who got their weekly homily and
>a fine of $25 or three days in jail, there were the Friday and Saturday
>night drunk-drivers.  The evidence the police gave never varied: the
>accused "had alcohol on his breath, had slurred speech, and was
>unsteady on his feet."  That observation was enough for conviction before
>the use of breathalyzers.
>
>Rod Phillips
>
>Roderick Phillips
>Editor, Journal of Family History/
>Professor, Department of History
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Carleton University
>Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1S 5B6
>Tel: (613) 520-2600 ext 2824; fax: (613) 520-2819
>Email address: [log in to unmask]
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>