Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1916-03-28
10 APP[LL l ONCE
SALOON INTERESTS WILL CARRY
MULcT REPEAL CASE TO
HIGHER COURT.
COURT lssUEs PERPETUAL
lkJuNcTaoN IN SUIT
Decision Of Judge Donsaan upholdins
Validity Of Repeal Law Most Sweep
ing - hsids Leoislaturs Had Full
Power to Pass Law RspsaIins Old
Statute.

Statute. &C. ..gs -.
Davenport, March 2s.-The decision
supporting the repeal Of the mulct law
and against the liquor interests In
Iowa, returned by Judge Donegan
yesterday decided the validity OF
the repeal Of the law. and permanent
injunction has been issued providing
for the closing Of the saloons in Dav-
export and the state OF Iowa.
Attic the pleadings in the cases,
in which John Hill, John Schnack and
John Navenx are the defendants, were
made up and submitted, and an early
decision was requested by counsel LOT
both the state and defense, the stfpu-
lation as to the facts, without which
a decree could not be rendered, was
not filed with Judge Donegan until
Saturday.
An immediate appeal from the de-
cision of the lower court to the SUI
preme court of the state OF Iowa will
be siled by Bollinger & Block, accord
ing to announcement, in an effort to
have the case brought up before the
highest tribunal in the state at the
May term.
There is but FIVE weeks to elapse
until the May term Of the supreme
court opens, and abstracts Of the case
must be on file thirty days before the
opening Of court.
Text of Decision.
The decision handed down by Judge
Donegan on the question as to wheth-
er saloons are legal in Davenport and
Iowa, follows:
This case, together with the cases
Of state VS.. Maven ct al, and state VS..
Schnack, which involve the same ques-
tons, has been submitted upon stip-.
ulation as to facts and without argu-
ment or citation Of authorities In be-
half of defendants. These cases In
volve the validity Of the repeal act OF
the Thirty-sixthi general assembly re-
pealing what is commonly known as
the 'tmulct law"
while the pleadings In these cases
were made up and submitted and
brief statement as to the position con-
tended for by the parties was made to
the court and an early decision re-
quested by counsel for both the state
and the defendants less than two
week ago, the stipulation as to the
facts, without which a decision could
not be reached, was not presented to
the court until within the past two
days. Under these circumstances any
opinion Of the court as to the ques-
tions involved reached upon such
brief consideration must necessarily be
unsatisfactory to the court rendering
the same However. In order to
:, n3x,fx1 l-n
possible to have the questions involved
presented to the supreme court at It's
next term. as requested by counsel
for both sides. we have during the
time intervening since, the pleadings
mitted to us, taken under considera-
ton the questions presented for de-
termination in these cases.
No Doubtful Questions.
These cases do not involve questions
which was properly and legally en-
acted. but they involve the questions as
to whether the act OF the legislature
has any legal and binding effect what
ever and whether. even II valid in some
respects. the act of the legislature is OF
any validity under the facts presented
ny Lie CdSCS at bdAs IA olhSA wa NO " v
are not called upon to determine what
the legislature intended to do. but
whether it had the power to pass the
act in question or the power to pass 1t
in the manner and form which it
adopted. <t. =
IF these cases were Of the former
class and presented merely questions of
construction or of legislative intent as
80 1a- xaHf lsi
hesitate about rendering decision un
and argued and carefully considered.
Counsel admit, however, that most of
the questions presented by the cases at
bar are entirely new and without any
precedent directly In point and that
the supreme court must pass upon
them. and urge that the interests OF
clients will be served better by an early
decision even II adverse than by ia
! yorable decision II long delayed.
lIiegaIity Not Assured.
"Confnfng ourselves to general prin-
ciples, therefore, and without the aid
of argument or authorities, we find 1.
to be well recognized rule that even
the supreme court win not interfere to
hold a legislative act void or invalid
unless such clearly appears to be the
case and this rule should apply with
still more force to the lower courts. Al
stated IN the Central Iowa Railway
Company W. the board Of supervisors
ct al. 81 Iowa 18S. It is Fundamental
| that q statute should not be declared
| UNCONSTITUTIONAL unless 1t Its clearly
So" The same rule has been repeated
" announced and followed In many
other decisions by the supreme cour,
81 this state. II. the absence OF any
| precedent the inyestigat tons which VIZ
have made and the consideration which
| we have been able to give to the ques-