Polk County observer. (Monmouth, Polk County, Or.) 1888-1927, 1905-12-01
LOWER COURT REVERSED
Chinese Restaurant Keeper Wins His
Suit Against City of Inde-
pendence.

The Supreme Court Of Oregon on
Monday last handed down an opinion
in the case Of Wong Sing, appellant,
vs., City of Independence and w. G.
Sharman as recorder, respondents, in
which the judgment Of the Circuit
Court for Polk County was reversed
and decision rendered in favor of
the appellant. The opinion of the
Court was written by Judge Moore.
The case was originally instituted
by the City Of Independence in the
Recorders court of that city against
Wong Sing, a Chinese restaurant
keeper, on charge of selling intoxi-
eating liquors without license. The
complaint accused the Chinaman with
having sold splrituous or malt liquors
in the City of Independence without a
license. The name Of the purchaser
Of the intoxicating liquors was not
alleged in the complaint, nor was
there any statement as to the quantity
Of liquor sold.
The defendant in the proceeding in
the Recorders court demurred to the
complaint on the grounds that more
than one offense was attempted to be
charged in the complaint, and that
the complaint did not state facts sufIi-
cient to constitute crime. The Re
corder disallowed the demurrer, and
upon trial, convicted the defendant
and sentenced him to pay a fine and
costs.
The defendant then sued out writ
Of review in the Circuit Court, alleging
numerous defects in the complaint
filed in the Recorders Court, and the
case was afterwards tried before Judge
Galloway, who, at the last May term
OF the Circuit Court, dismissed the re-
view proceeding and affirmed the
judgment of conviction in the Re-
corders Court The Circuit Judge
held that the charter aud ordinances
Of the city conferred upon the China
man the right to appeal and that SO
long as this right existed the case
could not be heard on writ of review.
The Supreme Court in reversing the
judgment of the lower Court holds
that no right to appeal from a iudg-
ment Of the Recorders court is given
by the charter Of Independence, and
that the ordinance of the city which
attempts to confer the right TO appeal
is void as beyond the power of the
council to enact Considering the
complaint in the Recorders court, the
Supreme Court decides that a com
plaint charging the sale of "spirituous
or malt" liquors is defective under the
statute, because the words "spirituous"
and malt" are not Synonymous, and
that the complaint therefore charges
the commission of more than one
offense.
The Court further holds that the
commission to allege the quantity of
liquor sold is fatal to the complaint,
for the reason that by the ordinance
under which the appellant was con-
victed, it is only made an offense to
sell intoxicating liquors in less guam
titles than one gallon.
On the question of whether the name
of the alleged purchaser should be
stated, the Court does not express an
opinion, but says: 'The conclusion
reached upon this question by the
Courts Of last resort are variant; but,
as the complaint in the case at bar is
so defective in other respects, we do
not deem it necessary 10 decide the
question presented. "
The judgment Of the Circuit Court
is reversed and the case is sent back,
with directions to dismiss the judg-
ment Of the Recorders court.