Vernon County censor. [volume] (Viroqua, Wis.) 1865-1955, 1911-07-05
MEMORANDUM DECISION

The principal question discussed and considered
upon the oral argument was the validity of the
proceedings taken 20 establish the city of Niroqua
a residence district under and pursuant to the
provisions of CHAPTER ISIS Of the laws of l90T. For
that reason will state my views on that question;
A reading of the act makes It clear that the leg
islature intended TO cover two situations: One
where proposed district iacluded territory where
in heretofore saloons had been located, and Sec
Ond. districts wherein saloons had been To-
Gated. In the first clause which is covered by
section 5S5f. certain smptions to what shall
be included provided for In the second clause.
covered by section ibb5e. no exceptions whatever
obtains. and as | view il the question is to be de-
termtned by a consideration of two propositions.
First, does the act contemplate the inclusion Of
entire town. city or village; and second If it does.
whether the word prior in the clause. where
in no license to sell deal or traffic in malt vinous.
spirituous or Intoxicating liquors has been issued
or granted PRIOR 10 he fling Of the remonstance
hereinafter referred to- means at any time prior.
argued by connselis to be limited TO the year
Immediately preceding.
II is extremely to he regretted that the lesiSla-
ture could not have so worded tho statute as to
leave doubt upon either of these questions.
However it is the duty of the court. if possible. &c
SO interpret the statute as 10 harmonic and
give effect to all its provisions without violence &c
1 the common understanding of the words EN-
ployed The act provides for the establishment Of
/ districts in cities Vilaa9es or towns. The Wort
( district. as defined by Webster. means T. o.
vide into districts limited portions of territory
as legislatures district states foc the choice OF
/ representatives"
/ think the common understanding OF the Ian.
4 Euave of the statute would he that il did rot
4 authorize or contemplate the inclusluN # en-
/ tire municipality in a district The act does not
! seem 60 contemplate any repeal Or modification q
any part Of the local option statute or the pro
/ vision OF section i5eAe. which would be rendered
practically migratory were it 80 be held that sucl
districts might include the entire corporate limits
But even il the act does authorize the Inclusion o.
Z a whole city. IN the clause quoted from section
tS6bg the word wherein undoubtedly refers &
the district not to the town village or city
And as view It. there is opportunity to say
that there any limitation intended 10 be ap
piled So the use Of the word pricr." hut Il wa
or villages where no saloons have ever been 10
Gated prior 70 the filing Of the reucp STRANGE, 81
that the Inhabitants Of such district might PRO
tect themselves against the Sctiou uf any city o
village council. If the granting Of the preniptor
writ in this case were dependent upou the con
struction to Be given to this act. | think il ceA
that the premptory writ should be granted am
reasonably clear that mandamus would lie IN
case OF this kind where the council had refused {
grant a license on Shc ground that they cunsidere,
that they vere not authorized SO 70 DO. yet upC
careful consideration Of the authorities hearin
upon that question. am Of the opinion that ~
court has no authority % require the city ts4ac
70 grant license. and Il IS inluSterial that the
refuse to grant il upon an erroneous corsideratio
o. the effect of the statute. AID not withstandiu
their express desire TO have the question judicial
determined and settled. For this season and upa
this ground the motion 70 Quasb is granted.
BY the Court. E. {. EiGREE Judge.
Dated June % 1911
/ Alderman Mcintosh presented tn
following resolution, which was rea
by the clerk;