Peering at the Past – Livestock at Large, Insulting Language and a Curfew

It was unlawful to drive cattle to and from pasture or water through village streets of Houston, Minn., in 1890. Both two-legged and four-legged residents were subjects of ordinances passed by the Village Council. Fines imposed over 130 years ago may sound minimal, but $1 in 1890 had the approximate purchasing of $34 in 2024. In addition to fines, there was also the cost of prosecution.

An 1889 ordinance was passed “for the Suppression of Vice, Indecency and immorality, and the Prevention of Crime Thereof.” Anyone convicted of public intoxication or use of “loud, boisterous profane or insulting language to excite a breach of peace” or fighting in any street or public place was to be punished by a fine of not less than $1 nor more than $100. 

It was unlawful for anyone “other than a policeman or officer authorized to maintain the peace and to serve process to carry or wear any pistol, slingshot, knuckles, bowieknife, dirk or other dangerous weapon” within the village. Also prohibited was discharging any other firearm or fireworks without permission. Conviction carried a fine not exceeding $25. 

It was unlawful to ride or drive any horse or mule in a reckless or disorderly manner in a village street or alley. The same law also addressed animal behavior thought inappropriate for public display. “No person shall indecently exhibit any stud horse or jack or let any such horse or jack to any mare or mares within the limits of the village, unless in some enclosed place out of public view under penalty of not less than five dollars nor more than twenty-five dollars for every such offense.”

Failure to pay fines and costs called for confinement in the Village Watch-house or county jail from 10 to 90 days, “according to the quality of the offense.”

Four months later in early 1890, the Village Council addressed livestock at large. In order to “prevent horses, mules, cattle, swine and sheep from running at large,” a village pound was established. The Village Council would appoint a pound master, who would keep the pound “in proper condition for the impounding and confining of such animals as may be found running at large.” 

Any owner (or a person with custody) who permitted any of those specified animals to “run at large” within the village was deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction was fined not more than $5 nor less than %1. Violators who failed to pay would be imprisoned in the village watch-house or county jail up to 10 days.

The pound master was due 25 cents for every horse, mule or cow taken and impounded and 10 cents for every pig or sheep. A year and five months later (July 1891), the fee for horses, mules and cattle was doubled to 50 cents. Unless payment was made plus the costs of keeping within three days the animal would be sold at public auction, after giving notice of the time and place of sale in three of the most public places in town.

Taking an animal from the pound without authorization was guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a fine of not less than $5 nor more than $25 . Anyone in default of payment might be imprisoned in the village watch-house or jail not exceeding 20 days.

Concern about four-legged residents “wandering” on town streets was extended in 1897 to include some two-legged denizens, specifically ”any person under the age of sixteen years of age, who shall be found upon any street, lane or alley of the said Village of Houston,” except a road contiguous to his or her residence or unless accompanied by a parent or guardian “between the hours of nine o’clock in the afternoon and four o’clock in the forenoon… from April first through the thirtieth day of September.” From October 1 through March 31, the restricted time began an hour earlier, at 8 p.m. 

The curfew violation was a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine not more than $10 plus costs for each offense. Failure to pay may have resulted in confinement in the village watch-house for no longer than 24 hours, “as the Court in its discretion may see fit.” Strict enforcement was the responsibility of the Village Marshal, who would give notice or warning of the curfew hours as directed by the Village Council, possibly by ringing a bell. 

In 1923, the four-legged creature of concern was the pet dog. All dog owners within town were to “procure a license,” valid for a year, for a fee of $2.50 for each male and $5 for each female.  The village recorder issued a tag to be attached to the dog’s collar and kept a record with the name of the owner, a description of each dog and license fee paperwork. No license would be granted if the dog was vicious or deemed a menace to the public.

It was also a misdemeanor to deface a dog tag or interfere with the marshal performing his duties. Conviction called for a fine of $10 to $20 plus costs. Failure to pay resulted in imprisonment in the village lockup or county jail for 10 to 20 days.

All dogs found in the city limits without a collar license tag would be placed with the Village Marshal who would attempt to ascertain and notify the owner. If ownership remained unknown, the marshal advertised in a legal newspaper for a week. If an owner appeared, paid all costs involved and if a resident, paid the license fee, the dog would be released. Non-residents did not have to pay the license fee.

“Whenever no one claims a dog within three days after notice or the one claiming legal rights to the possession of the dog refuse or neglect to pay the costs heretofore mentioned, the animal shall be killed or buried or otherwise disposed of.” However, the village could instead release the dog and undertake a civil action to recover expenses.