Daily Iowa State Democrat. [volume] (Davenport, Iowa) 1856-1859, 1858-07-18
For the State Democrat

The LICENSE LAW 1t has been a
matter Of some surprise among all classes
as to the reasons which induced the City
Magistrate, in his capacity as editor. to de-
nounce as invalid, a law which he will be
called upon to administer as such magis.
trate. This prejudging law in advance,
by the only court before whom its legality
may be first tested, is not in accordance with
my notions of good sense or good taste, ard
smacks more of demagogueism than Of any
desire to administer impartial justice.
The license law adopted by the City
Council is declared by him to be illegal, and
upon this subject we will take issue. with
out waiting for the form OF trial before
this hasty Judge.
The charter of this city, in Sec. 2 Of Art
5, granted to US in 1851, gives the Council
the right Of licensing and regulating re-
tailers OF spirituous and vinous liquors in
said city" In 1856 the legislature adopted
the "Prohibitory Liquor Law" and in it. in
Sec. II, the only repeating provision, relates
to the repeal of the "55th Chapter of the
Code of Iowa." and nowhere in said law
is there clause repeating all laws inconsis
tent or in conflict with that law.
The license law approved January 29th'
1857, has been declared void in all its pro-
visions by the Supreme Court of the State,
and must be laid entirely out ofthe question.
CHAPTER l57. passed and approved Janu-
ary 2Sth, 1857, repeals all Of the LIST section
Of the Prohibitory Liquor Law after the
eleventh line, and all Of sections 3. and s
of that law.
It will be perceived that section of the
prohibitory law forbids the sale of intoxi-
eating liquors and provides a penalty. This
section was repealed by the law Of Jan. 90.
1857, and has not been re enacted by any
law since. It is true that the last legisla-
turs by law Of March 23d. 1853, provides
that Sec. Of Chap 157 Of law of Jan. 29th,
1857, be amended 90 as to read as follows:
''That all of that part Of Sec. after the
words provided in the eleventh line, and
sections 4th. Sd 4 10th are hereby repealed"
This does not restore the 9th section of
the prohibitory law, for law once repeal
ed by repealing law, cannot be restored
by repeating the repealing law. See the
Code. Sec. % page 8, as follows: "The re-
peal Of q statute does not revive a statute
previously repealed"
In my opinion the only real question to
be decided, is, has the legislature, either
expressly or by legal effect, passed any law
that operates a. repeal Of the City Char
ter of Davenpostf ff Ess
The Supreme Court in the case Of the City
ofDavsnpost W Pritx, decided that the leg
islature could not pass special sw repeal
ing City Charter. but this was under the
New Constitution. Tho prohibitosy law
was adopted under the Old Constitution,
and Is that Law did not in express terms
suspend or repeal our Charter, but only the
55th Chapter Of the Code. the question is,
did it repeal our Charter bv implication p
1t is the opinion Of many Attorneys that the
Charter cannot be % repealed THAT it is in
the nature Of special graat-that it can
not be repealed BY general statute law by
implication, - gsneraf Law might be. In
the lath Of Ill Rspesta. psgs sss. Ottawa
W County Of LaSalle, the Court decided
that - suhssqusnt statute. saaieA i sssssel,
does not abrogats , former one which Il
epseial; nor doss Assassal NV opssaas =
. rspsal Il spssiAl Nv xhish \ passsd -
~ oane seosIea.s Fx a e.
lthiak thaa Y ~ o(ri11aGlalsols NJ
baalanAls svlllsl ~ tsaGsA = ~