Mushlin v. Rowell

• Decision Date: 03 February 1914
• Citation: 77 N.H. 183,89 A. 840
• Parties: MUSHLIN v. ROWELL et al.
• Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court

89 A. 840

77 N.H. 183

MUSHLIN

v. ROWELL et al.

Supreme Court of New Hampshire. Merrimack.

Feb. 3, 1914.

Transferred from Superior Court, Merrimack County; Chamberlin, Judge.

Petition by Isaac Mushlin for a writ of mandamus directed against John W. R. Rowell and another, as selectmen. Transferred without ruling on an agreed statement of facts. Case discharged.

Petition for mandamus to compel the Issuance of a junkdealer's license to the plaintiff. The defendants are the selectmen of Hooksett. Having licensed one Isenberg as a junkdealer in that town, they declined to license the plaintiff, on the sole ground that the number of licenses to be issued was a matter for them to decide, and that it was for the interest of the town that only one junkdealer should do business therein.

Remick & Jackson, of Concord, for plaintiff.

Hartin & Howe, of Concord, for defendants.

YOUNG, J. The only question considered is whether section 1, c. 124, Public Statutes, as amended by chapter 76, Laws 1905, authorizes the defendants to determine the number of licenses they will issue, as well as the suitability of applicants. Silverman v. Gagnon, 74 N. H. 502, 69 Atl. 886. The amended section provides that the selectmen of a town "may license persons, deemed by them to be suitable, to be dealers in * * * old junk." As the act is silent as to the number of licenses that may be issued in any town, it is probable the Legislature intended that one should be issued to any suitable person who applied for it State v. Cohen, 73 N. H. 543, 63 Atl. 928. To hold that the Legislature intended the selectmen to limit the number of licenses is not only to read such a provision into the statute, but also to hold that it intended to permit them to create a monopoly of the business in so far as their town is concerned.

Case discharged. All concurred.