The Mitchell capital. (Mitchell, Dakota [S.D.]) 1879-1918, 1914-02-19
NOT BOUND BY
VOTE ON DEALERS
SUPREME COURT SAYS TOW>
COUNCIL NEED NOT GIVE III
CENSES TO THOSE WIN
MING ELECTION.

Pierre. S. D.-The powers of a
city council or town board in certain
contingencies are defined by the IL
preme court in an opinion by Whit
ing, which reverses the lower court
of Brookings county, in the case OF
State ex rel Sam Alberts. VS.. Joseph
Noethe, mayor of the town of Elkton,
and the members OF The city council.
The contention appears to ave been
over the matter of granting saloon
licenses. Under the ''siX-hundred to
one" saloon act of the last session.
Elkton was entitled to but two sal
oons, and when, after a Favorable
vote had been secured, three appli-
cants asked permission, the question
to the people of the town appeared
to be which W. of the three should
be chosen, and they p%etitioned the
city board to call Il special election
to ALLOW the voters to pick their men.
The petition was granted and offic-
ers appointed to receive and return
the votes. The result showed that
Sam Alberts received 116 votes, =.
IL. Connolly $50 votes, and c. $.
Paulson 81 votes. After such cleo
ton. the council proceeded to grant
licenses to Connolly and Paulson. Al
berts objected and in the circuit
court secured a decision in his favor,
the court holding that the vote when
received by the council was binding
upon them, and that it could not con-
slider any names except those given
a majority vote. The supreme court
refuses to take this view of the case,
as the election was not called to re-
fer a resolution or ordinance, but was
merely the same expression OF opin-
ion as a petition would have been.
The language of the court is that
there is no election unless the pro-
posed ordinance of resolution is not
adopted by the council" aud las to
whether there rested, after the result
OF the election had been decided, u
moral duty Upon the respondents, APP
pellants here, to grant Il permit to the
relator and Connolly, is a matter with
| which the court has no concern
certainly no legal duty was imposed
upon them" The lower court is re
verSed.
Other opinions by Whiting are:
Chas. S. Hardin VS.. James D.. Har-
din, ct al. Lawrence, reversed.
Mary Gotthelf VS.. Merchants bank.
Minnehaha. affirmed.
Time to Name Commissioners.
Presiding Justice Smith affirms
the lower court of Lyman county, i'll
the case Of State eX rel David Rea-
rick VS.. County Commissioners. In
this case Rearick was a petition can
didate for county commissioner to fill
the vacancy caused by the removal OF
| such an officer from the county
When he presented his certificate of
election to the board. and asked APP
prevail of his bond. it was refused on
the ground thaJ the county appoint
ing board had appointed a commits
sioner to fill the ~uneXpired term.
his contention was that the time to
fill the vacancy was at the first gen
eral election following the rcsigna
ton, and in that he was sustained by
the lower court. which has been af-
firmed by the supreme court.
Other opinions by Smith are.
State ex rel Frank McNulty VS..
Frank P. Glasner, secretary of state.
petition granted (this is the formal
opinion in the caso announced on
Thursday.
George e. Adams VS.. Mark b..
Scott, Minnehaha, affirmed.
Sprick Bros, Investment Co, vs., j..
D.. Whipple, Aurora, reversed.
Opinions by Justice Mccoy We're.
Frank G. Huntington, trustee, VS..
Knapp & Spencer Co., Brown, at
firmed
Joseph W.. Catlett VS.. w. II. Stok-
es, Hamlin, affirmed.
State VS.. Carl Anderson, Gregory,
affirmed.
Herman Grabinski vs.. United Stat
es Annuity and Life Insurance Co.,
Faux, affirmed.
In the matter OF estate OF James
Hackett, deceased, VS.. Eugene Hack
EFT, ct al, Clay, reversed.
Commercial and Savings bank VS..
C. NJ. Cassem, Devison, reversed.
C. j. Bliss VS.. w. T.. Waterbury,
Jerauld, reversed.
BY Polley-Reeves & Co. VS.. John |
w. McGee. ct al, Pennington, affirm
py EateS-Eiyind Klaypeec We |