In re Henery

• Citation: 100 N.W. 43,124 Iowa 358
• Parties: IN RE HENERY ET AL.
• Decision Date: 13 June 1904
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

124 Iowa 358

100 N.W. 43

IN RE HENERY ET AL.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

June 13, 1904.

Appeal from District Court, Madison County; A. W. Wilkinson, Judge.

The opinion states the case. Reversed in part, and affirmed in part.C. A. Robbins, Co. Atty., for appellant.

J. E. Tidrick, for W. J. Henery.

J. A. Guiher, for E. B. Griswold and M. E. Smith.

WEAVER, J.

The three appellees, Griswold, Henery, and Smith, who are registered pharmacists doing business in the city of Winterset, having severally made application to buy, keep, and sell intoxicating liquors for lawful purposes, the county attorney appeared thereto and opposed the granting of said petitions. The trial court found for applicant in each case, and granted a permit as prayed. The cases seem to have been heard together below, and have been so argued and submitted in this court. In cases of this kind, the trial court has the advantage of the personal presence of the applicants and witnesses, and can so much better judge of the merits of the application than can we from the printed record that we interfere with its finding with reluctance. Moreover, the proceeding is at law, and the result in each case turns largely, if not entirely, upon fact propositions, and, if there be any basis in the evidence for the finding appealed from, we cannot set it aside. If, however, there be in the record any admitted or clearly established fact which renders the applicant ineligible to become a permit holder, it then becomes our duty to reverse the order granting it. Is there any such showing as to either of the three appellees?

1. It was shown that some or all of the applicants were in the habit of selling soda water and ice cream during the season for such refreshments, and it is contended by the county attorney that this brings such places of business within the description of “eating houses, restaurants, and saloons,” keepers of which cannot be lawfully granted permits. We think this would be a strained and unreasonable interpretation of the statute. The sale of soda water and ice cream is ordinarily carried on as a mere incident in connection with some other business or occupation, and it would be a wide departure from the usual and accepted meaning of the words to hold that every place in which such refreshment is found is to be classed as restaurant, eating house, or saloon. Such is not the practical interpretation which the people generally have placed upon the law, and we are not justified in establishing any such extreme precedent. The distinction between places provided solely or principally as resorts for food or drink and those which are devoted to other legal...