The Mitchell capital. (Mitchell, Dakota [S.D.]) 1879-1918, 1907-08-02
TEXT OF DECISION
Judge Smith Gave Ills Decision
Favor Of Licensing Saloons
Out at Plankinton.

Below is published the decision OF
Judge Frank Smith in the case of
the Pankinton saloon license case,
tie action being established by the
Anti-SaIoon League OF South Dakota.
The league contended that the
license did not receive a majority OF
the votes Cast at the election held
in April, and which is required
under the law. There were 10 votes
cast in favor of license and Il votes
aglnst, and under chat vote the city
council declared that license carried.
The contention of the league was
that inasmuch as l66 votes we're
cast at the, election it was necessary
for tile license question to receive a
majority of that number of votes.
The following is the decision Of
the court in the case:
\ short statement of the facts of
this case as they appear to the Court.
| think will better enable us to un-
derstand 1T. The city of Plankinton
Is composed OF three wards. On the
10Th Gay OF April, 1907, a general
election was held in said city, at
which the question, ''Shall intoXi-
eating liquors be sold at retail was
Submitted to the voters of said city,
and voted upon in each OF the three
wards. The vOte of each ward was
counted by the judges of election for
such ward, and the returns certified
to the city council, and the city
council! met as a c%anyaSsing board on
fine OOI4 6o a. of 4 mil onl no,p,rcnI
the votes SO returned to them 10y the
judges of election, and declared that
the question q selling Intoxicating
liquors at retail was carried at said
election. Subsequently, applications
we've made to the city council by
different persons for license to sell
Intoxicating liquors at retail and the
council Was about to act upon Sucn
applications and determine whether
or not to grant licenses to such APP
plicants, and this action is brought
asking for il writ of prohibition to
prevent the council from acting upon
applications for license. based upon
the ground that, as shown by the
vote cast at The city election ON
April l6, 1907, the question of
whether Intoxicating liquors should
be sold at retail did not receive the
affirmative vote of a majority OF the
voters Of The CITY OF P%lankinton yot-
ing at such election.
After an exhaustive Investigation
of the law, have concluded that
the wilt of prohibition must be
Court has decided in the case of
State ex. rel. Crothers against Bar
Der and others, l0l N. W., l016-l9
S. D., j, that the writ will he used
to prevent a town board or city
council from acting upon applica-
items for saloon licenses in cases
where the question of whether or
not Intoxicating liquors shall be sold
had not been voted upon at the
previous elections But where there
has been an election at which the
question of sale of Intoxicating
liquors bad been voted upon. and
the votes counted ny tbs judges OF
election. and certified to the city
council, and the results declared
by tue tity council, %ctins as a can
wasting board, an entirely different
question IS presented.
Ii IS nndispnted law that the writ
OF prohibition is not, and cannot
be, used for the purpose of reviewing
and correcting the errors Of law OF
has inrisdiction az fine subircf -.
Ter MOON which n rs acting line
writ Of %prODlbitian is u~njyplsllly
conceded to he upplicable ONLY +.
prevent huaros az rr:nunals from
acting upon subjects on matters owe
where they exceed Their i~uIjsdicIi0r
and 90 Deyond What is their iuf.
jsdielion upon a SUBJECT pnder Gon.
slderali0n. il ii had Ilnjsdicli9n owe,
the subject mat or unon which II, l.
attelnuti6u 10 .cl. lien it's errors q,
mistakes, go nla ter nov apparent
they may De. cannot ne torrrctpu a,
reviewer upon writ Of n@lanlnilion.
High ls<. Legal Rem. S 10. ~.
Nov Wheu a. election is leld a,
which toe question. ,.ShalI inioxi
cating lipuais To- sol AT rttatl?' Is
vote, ul.ou. the nldpps of elertio,
have undoui. ii iuilsulctiQn to count