The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1898-04-26
CHARLESTON LIQUoR GASES.
recent Decision Of Tie snpreme Cont in
Fight Dstwetn the County conrtia and
Guy ounoli--Ju Judge Dents opinloh.

Fight Detwetn the County Court and
Guy connoli---Juds, Dent's Opinion.
speclai Correspondence, z
CHARLESTON. w. Va, April rs
The fight between the county court and
,he city council which began n year
ESQ, partially came TO end last week.
when the supreme court OF appeals de.
cIled In the case OF the cite OF Char
lesion IS. George Dcllcr, that the city
ia exempt from the costs In the case.
and that the liquor men will be ON
pcllcd to bear tho burden, which Is In
Inc ncIahoorhood Of sl4, 1000.
The trouble begun when the Demo.
cratic council demanded the right 90.
PASS last upon permits for liquor IL
ccnses. 4, Republican court denied Tho
right 20 council, and INSERTED emphat.
irllly that II had been the custom for
sears 10 allow that privilege TO tho
court, and Furthermore the law was
explicit when II gave them final power.
The nrst OF May saw q dry town. and
FOR months the struggle continued,
neither the court " the council reced-
ing from the position they had taken.
4 minority OF the council met In tho
course OF time and granted licenses,
which were acted fayorabiS upon by the
court, and the saloon keepers again
opened their doors; but every morn
ing Mayor deGrnyter, who was identi-
lied with the maJorhe members OF
council. summoned them all before him
aud fined them $50 and costs. This
was kept up until The saloon keepers ap-
pcalcd their eases TO the circuit court,
where Judge Guthrie decided In their
favor, and threw The city ipth ;hc cHNiS
From this court the city appealed TO
,Ie supreme court, where II was re-
lievcd from the burden os costs. and
the saloon keepers are made to pay for
the stubbornhess OF the politicians.
.,Jndgs Dnni's Decl.,on.
In his opinion, Judge Dent gives a
sweeping decision, and opens the v
me 10 moro trouble In the future. The
syllabus reads:
I.-violation OF the public ordinances
Of cities, towns and villages are strict
" criminal IN their nature, being Of
lenses against the public. and not
merely private wrongs.
s-ln prosecution for such %ofIeHses.
costs are not recovered against such
cities. towns ard villages.
s-ProhibItion is The proper remedy
20 prevent the enforcement by execu-
zion OF unauthorized Judgment for
costs.
In defense Of, his position Judge Dent
says: THE city of Charleston praSs n
prohibition against the judge OF the
circuit court OF Kanawha county pro-
h,oitins the enforcement OF Judgment
for costs against the city in favor OF
one George Beller III a. prosecution for
a violation OF the ordinance Of the Pc
%lltioHer.
1t is admitted that the petitioner
would not be liable for costs ut COM
mon law. and that they can only be
imposed by virtue OF statutory enact
mant. The statutes OF this state have
clearly provided for the allowance OF
costs IN all civil proceedings 10 the
party substantially prevailing. but in
criminal proceedings they onlS ALLOW
costs TO be recovered against the ac4
euscd in case OF some conviction, and
n some cases in his favor on acquittal
against a private prosecutor, but reVe:
against the public. the state or its u
taorlzed representative. 4 contro-
versy is thus raised as 20 whether pros
ecutIon for violations o. the ordinances
OF municipalities are civil or crimina!
proceedings.
Branch OF STATE Government,
In It's governmental capacity a mun-
tcipality Is strictly a branch of the
state government within the extent OF
its limitations, both as to territory and
powers granted. And in the discharge
Of It's duties its officers are public Off
GERS. for whose-a acts the municipality Is
In no wise responsible. The enforce
ment OF flnesN penalties and imprison-
nent under the ordinances OF the NUM-
cipaIity are governmental duties for
the protection OF society against the
lawless and the preservation Of good
order. and is purely 4 state or public
function, and while 1t is done in the
name OF the municipality, K is by the
sovereignty OF the people, and there
fore in whatever case the state Is ex-
empt from liability of costs, the NUM-
clpality is likewise. To hold other
wise is 10 make the municipality LA
bic 70" the governmental acts of It's off,
GERS, and subject II 10 n fine in all
cases In which they fail to sustain
prosecution against alleged offenders
o. its ordinances. and thus subject It
10 Imminent bankruptcy. The corpor-
nte name OF the city OF Charleston Is a
mere nonentity, representative OF the
state or the people residing In tie cor
rorate boundaries, and there is neither
Law nor justice in inficting upon them
the costs occasioned by the public OFF,
GERS inslitutins certain public prose-
c%utioDs, without sufficient cause or fall
ing 10 sustain them by Neglect, over
sight or incapaclty when properly insti-
tuted. AS q part of the state sover-
eighty they are entitled to immunity
from costs.
Point Sttll Left Open.
Thus 1t will be seen that the court
has settled only n minor point OF the
case that has caused the city OF Char
lesion SO much trouble, and the Ques-
ton OF final power Is still left open.
Inc Democrats are hopeful that .sudGe
Mcdonald, president of the court, will
SIN hold out and again plunge the.
city into a fight when the question OF
license again comes up May !.
SHE WAS FRnN cUirAG0l