Renshaw v. Lane County Court

• Decision Date: 19 March 1907
• Citation: 49 Or. 526,89 P. 147
• Parties: RENSHAW et al. v. LANE COUNTY COURT.
• Court: Oregon Supreme Court

89 P. 147

49 Or. 526

RENSHAW et al. v. LANE COUNTY COURT.

Supreme Court of Oregon

March 19, 1907

Appeal from Circuit Court, Lane County; Lawrence T. Harris, Judge.

Action by William Renshaw and another against G.R. Chrisman as county judge and others. Decree for defendants, and plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.

This is a suit by William Renshaw and his partner against G.R Chrisman, as county judge of Lane county, and the other members of the county court thereof, to restrain them from making an order, prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquors in the city of Eugene, and also to have the election held in the county, to determine whether or not such sales should be prohibited therein, declared invalid so far as the votes cast affect the city. The complaint states that the plaintiffs are engaged in selling alcoholic liquors at retail in Eugene, and in April, 1906, by virtue of an ordinance, which was in force pursuant to a charter granted February 18, 1905, they secured from the city a license to conduct their business therein for the term of one year, paying therefor the sum of $500; that relying upon the faith of the authority conferred, they expended in furnishing a building, and in procuring a stock of liquors, more than $3,000; that a purported petition having been presented to the defendants, they made a pretended order that an election should be held June 4, 1906 to determine whether or not the sale of intoxicating liquors should be prohibited in the entire county, including the limits of the city; that the election having been held, the ballots cast thereat were canvassed, and an abstract thereof made, which purports to show that there were polled 2,276 votes in favor of prohibition and 2,048 against the measure and that the defendants, as the county court of Lane county threaten and will, unless restrained, make an order declaring the pretended result of the election and prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquors in the entire county, to plaintiffs' irreparable injury. A demurrer to the complaint, on the ground that it did not state facts sufficient to warrant equitable intervention, having been sustained, the suit was dismissed, and the plaintiffs appeal.

A.C. Woodcock and Chas. A. Hardy, for appellants.

John M. Williams, Dep. Dist. Atty., for respondents.

MOORE J. (after stating the facts).

The transcript shows that the charter of the city of Eugene passed in February, 1893, empowered the common council as follows: "To license, tax, regulate, or prohibit barrooms, drinking shops, tippling houses, billiard rooms, dancehouses, and all places where spirituous, malt, or vinous liquors are sold." Laws Or.1893, p. 574, § 48, subd. 18. A local option law, initiated by petitions, pursuant to an amendment of the Constitution (1 B. & C.Comp. p. 72), was enacted by vote of the citizens of the state at an election held June 6, 1904. Laws Or.1905, p. 41. This act prescribes the manner of prohibiting the sales of intoxicating liquors in any county or part thereof, including an incorporated town or city, by a majority vote of the qualified electors in favor of the measure. An act was passed by the legislative assembly in February, 1905, reincorporating the city of Eugene, and repealing all acts and parts of acts in conflict therewith. Sp.Laws Or.1905, p. 243. The new charter was adopted to enable the city to acquire a system of waterworks, to secure a plant for manufacturing gas or generating electricity for illumination, and to sell municipal bonds to raise money...