Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1884-03-28
\ Legal Opinion.
M">rEs,No, March % 1851

WV i''I"Sot VI tuduN Cit'IclS
OF MOntesano, | give to the public
a legal opinion as to the legality of
the city ordinance, prohibiting the
sale or disposition Of spurious, malt
or iermented liquors, within the cor
porate limits of said city; and as to
whether Mr.. VI. +. Luark is a legal
IS constituted Justice of the Peace
under the city charter of Montesano
possess ing jurisdiction to hear, try,
and determine cases for the violation
of city ordinances Of said city.
Ia discussing these points, four
questions are necessary to he an
swered III the affirmative:
FIRST, Had the Legislature of
Washington Territory the power to
grant a charter to said city, giving
its Common Council authority to
prohibit the sale AMI disposition of
such liquors within the corporate
limits Of said city?
Second. Has the Legislature by
the city charter, authorized the Com
mon Council TO pass an ordinance
prohibiting the sale of such spirit
Gus, malt or fermented liquors,
within the limits of said city?
Third, Has the Common Council
passed an ordinance prohibiting the
sale or disposition of such liquors?
Fourth, Did the appointment of
Mr.. NJ. F. Luark, as Justice of the
Peace for said city, by the Common
Council thereof, constitute him le-
gal Justice of the Peace, with power
to act as such, under the city ordi :
nances
The legislative authority of a
State, over the subject matter of
spurious, malt or fermented liquors,
is unlimited, and its power to pass
laws prohibiting the sale and dispo,
sition Of such liquors, has been set
tied by repeated decisions of the
highest tribunals in our land, and
cannot now he questioned on consti-
tutional or other grounds. [See
People rs. Hawley, 3 Mich, page
1880; Reynolds vs.. Geary, 26 Conn.
179; One House vs.. State, 4 Greene,
Iowa, l72; Lincoln vs.. Smith, q
VT, 1913; Thomas vs.. Mount Vernon,
8 Ohio, 29l; 5 Howard, U. S. r.,
$50; Cooley's Constitutional Limita-
ton, aud cases cited, $50, State VS..
Robinson, 80 Maine, 5GS; WEIGH vs..
S'owell, 2 Doug, Mich, 1872.
The line Of separation between
State and national power furnishes
reliable analogy between that Of
the nation and Washington Terri
tory. Mary Phelps ct al. VS.. City of
Panama, l Washington Territory
Reports, page $40.
In the charter of the city of Non
tesano, the Legislature Of Washing
ton Territory conferred upon the
Common Council Of said city power
to prohibit the sale and disposition
Of spurious, malt or fermented liq.
uors, within its corporate limits, see
9th sub division of Article 6 Of the
city charter of Montesano. In con.
formity with the provisions of said
charter, the Common Council, under
penalties of fine and imprisonment,
has passed and promulgated an oidi-
nee prohibiting tie sale or dispo-
si,iou Of spurious, malt or fermented
Liquors in the corporate limits of
sad city, except by apothecaries
aud druggists, under certain restric-
tons. Sec 9Th ordinance Of said
city, section 3. It follows as a legal
conclusion that the sale or DISPOSE
ton Of spurious, malt or fermented
liquors within the city of Monte
sano, except such as may be sold
by apothecaries and druggists, un-
der the restrictions named in said
ordino nee is illegal. and tho vendors
thereof are liable to arrest. fine and
Imprisonment. under the city ordi.
narces. for each and every glass of
liquor sold in said city. The Com.
mon Council are authorized by Sec
ton 2, Of article 2, of said city char
ter, to select or appoint Justice Of
the Peace Of the precinct within
which said city is situated, and Sec
ton 2 Of Article 3, OF said charter,
expressly declares that the Justices
Of the Peace of said city shall, within
the limits Of the city, have jurisdic-
ton over oil violations of city ordi.
nances, hold to bail, fine or commit
persons found guilty Of any violation
thereof, and section 3, of Article 2,
expressly declares that no person is
eligible to any Office in the munich
pal corporation, who at the time Of
his election or appointment is not
entitled to the privilege of an cleo
tor according to the laws of this Ter
ritory, and who has not resided in
said city sixty days preceding each
election. These three sections must
be construed together, und taken to-