Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1900-04-16
lA NOLCP[HIlN
Important Ruling b. the Supreme
Court as 70 Withdrawal Of
NamsA
stgners Nay Order Their Signatures
Erased Any Time Before ON
cial Canvass.
Work Of Grading the D. & N. o,
Right-of. Way Will Begin
May I.

ANsS 1MoAleS, April lb.-AmCnS the
decisions handed down by the supreme
court Saturday was one in q case from
Fayette county, involving the question
whether signers OF a mulct consent PEE
Itition may Withdraw their names. The
court holds that they may at any
time before the petition Is canvassed.
The case was entitled Thomas L.
Green vs.. F. NJ. Smith ct all, appel
la nts. Fayette county, Il. z. Fellows.
Judge: opinion by sherwin.
On December 1, 1897, there was filed
IN Fayette county mulct petition
which was found by the supervisors to
have rty-three in excess of 65 per
cent of the vote OF the preceding gem
seral election. Seventy persons ape
piled to have their names stricken
from the statement. The lower court
held that these names should not have
been counted and the statement was
held insufficient. The defendants then
appealed. In the district court the
county attorney appeared against the.
statement of consent and objection
was made to it. The supreme court,
however, holds that the county attor-
ney is required thus to appear. The
defendants demanded trial by jury
and 1t was refused. The supreme court
sustains this action, saying: This is
special proceeding, in its inception
there We're no parties to it. there was
no private right to be protected or in
forced, nor any private wrongs to be
prevented or redressed; it was an ex
parte statement Of consent to the sale
of liquors by any one who might COM
ply with the law. The statute does
not require trial by jury, and in
such cases we have held that it was
not an absolute right"
1t was contended that after state-;
ment of consent has been fled, rights
vest hereunder and no one can there
after withdraw his consent. The SUI
preme court holds that the legislature
intended the petition should not be eff
fective till after its canvass. The fling
of the petition was necessary to give
the board Jurisdiction, but conferred
no rig hit except that of hoving its sufh-
cheney determined. Shall 1t be said
that person who voluntarily signs a
petition cannot, before action is taken
thereon, withdraw his consent. and by
proper written notice request the
board to annul his act, when the very
purpose Of the statement is to shiM
that a certain percent OF the voters
consent to the sale of liquors? To say
that one may not withdraw his con-
sent before rights are acquired there-
under is not sound in principle nor
sustained by the authorities. The de-
duction of these names leaves the
statement insufficient, and the trial
court is sustained in so holding.
"A DOG CASE.
John Eulberg's dog bit Nellie Van
Bergen contrary to the peace and dig
nifty of Sioux county: whereupon Nell
Lie, being a minor, brought suit
AGAINST Eulberg thru her next friend,
Mary Van Bergen. for damages. Judge
George w. Wakefield, sitting in judg-
ment upon the case, allowed verdict
for damages. and the dog, not being a
citizen, appealed the owner. The
supreme court in discussing the case,
lays down certain rules for the con-
duct of yiciously inclined dogs. The
court says: That the injured girl
threw sticks and stones at the dog
furnished no excuse. A dog has no
right to brood over its wrongs and re-
member in malice. The only defense
available to the dogs master Is the
doing OF an unlawful act at the time
Of the attack by the person injured
In the defense Of this position the
court cites sundry authorities and re-
verses the decision Of the lower court.