The Salt Lake herald-Republican. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1909-1918, 1910-09-18
~ INrronrANr DEcIsIoN.

laws OF Utah Tor the absolute prohtbt-
ton OF saloons in any city. town or
county IN the state IS absolutely dem
onstrated IN a decision Of the supreme
court OF Utah rendered yesterday.
That nc commissioners OF any county,
the council Of any city, and the
trustees Of any town. can positively
refuse TO authorize a liquor license.
that they are not required TO give rea-
sons for their action. and that their
acts in this connection are not review
able By any court IN the state IS the
Eist OF tho opinion as written by JUS
tice ID. y. suaup. the other judges
being IN full accord with him. All
that Is required. under the law. OF the
county commissioners. city council OF
town trustees IS that they consider the
application for tho license.
h Morgan county saloonkeeper in
1909 filed an application with the
COUNTY comm DESIGNERS for a renewal of
his nquor license. his license to run
saloon. The county commissioners
decided that Il were better for the
county that the sale OF liquor there
should cease. and they accordingly re-
fused 10 renew his license. The sa-
-oonist took the case TO the district
court and asked for an order COM
polling the commissioners 20 grant
the license The district judge in
structed the commissioners either to
renew the license or come into court
20 show why they refused TO do so.
Tho court finally ordered the license
granted. The commissioners took an
appeal 20 the supreme court Of the
state.
In overruIinE tho district court. and
deciding that the license need not be
granted. tho supreme court says:
And by our statute a wide discre-
tionary power as conferred upon
the board OF county commission
ers IN passing upon applications
liquors within their territorial
Jurisdiction. when an applica-
ton FOR license is made TO them.
10 unducstionably is their duty TO
consider a.. to make proper in
uuiry concerning tt, and. upon the
rcsPonsibihty Of their. official
oath. 20 reach a determination
But the duty OF the commission
ers In the premises 20 grant IT,
cc-res is not imperative and man
It is clearly set forth I'm the deci-
sion that the commissioners Of any
county in Utah may refuse any orssr
applications that are made to them
Tor license 20 sell liquor The law re-
duires them 90 consider all such ap-
plicati0ns. but it does not require
them to grant any OF them. The su-
preme court has decided I'm fits pro-
nounccmcnt OF yesterday that IL is not
within the province Of any court In
the state 20 review the acts OF the
county commissioners with reference
10 liquor licenses The commissioner
are responsible only 90 the people OF
the county for these acts. The su-
prcrne courts position IS that the
power Of the county commissioners S
delegated % them by the state. thai
their acts IN this connection are 4
part or the sovereign power and thai
the courts cannot interfere with them
Along this line. the decision says:
II they reach a conclusion TO gran
or refuse n license 20 an appli
cant. they are not answcrablc q
the courts FOR their conduct an
discharge OF duty. but 20 IN
people VINO conferred AiAN NWNf
upon them 20 regulate and con
troll the liquor traffic and clothes
them with the discretion 90 gran
or refuse Licenses.
In their opinion. as written by Jus
tice Straup. the justices Of the su
prene court quote the sections Of tn
statutes Of Utah in which power 4
conferred upon the boards Of count,
commissioners fn their RESPECTIVE
counties. the city councils I'm their To
Fpective cities. and the boards o
trustees in their respective towns. &
grant liquor licenses. Section No
1915 Of the Revised Statutes of Utal
says:
Any application for such license
may b. refused. for good cause
in the discretion Of the board o
trustees OF the town. the est
council 81 the city. or board @
county commissioner.
That the question OF tho sale Of in
sox eating liquors in the state Of Utal
& much nearer the people than ha
been generally understood is clea
from this opinion. Tho rovernin
boards who are directly responsible
have Il IN their hands 90 regulate IN
1iquor traffic or 20 prohibit its sale al
together. The members Of tines
boards are directly responsible 70 tn
people They can grant licenses an
regulate the sale OF liquors or the
can refuse TO permit such sales /
their respective territories. and n
one. not even the courts. can interior
.eith them. Their judgment IS abso
lutte.
THAT they are and will be respons
ivo 70 public sentiment there can 3
no question. They are sufficient
near the people that they must n
rpond. 4 prcponderance Of sent
rnent in any county. any town or an
city in the state against the sale