State ex rel. Howie v. Common Council of Northfield

• Decision Date: 30 December 1904
• Citation: 101 N.W. 1063,94 Minn. 81
• Parties: STATE ex rel. HOWIE v. COMMON COUNCIL OF CITY OF NORTHFIELD.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

94 Minn. 81

101 N.W. 1063

STATE ex rel. HOWIE

v.COMMON COUNCIL OF CITY OF NORTHFIELD.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Dec. 30, 1904.

Appeal from District Court, Rice County; Thomas S. Buckham, Judge.

Application by the state, on the relation of John Howie, Jr., for writ of mandamus against the common council of the city of Northfield. Demurrer to the answer overruled, and relator appeals. Affirmed.

Syllabus by the Court

1. The question whether a license for the sale of intoxicating liquors shall be granted to an applicant therefor within the city of Northfield rests in the sound judgment and discretion of the common council, in the exercise of which they act judicially, and not ministerially, and their action cannot be controlled or reviewed by mandamus.

2. The council may, if in its judgment the best interests of the inhabitants of the city demand it, limit the number of saloon licenses to be granted. F. M. Wilson and A. B. Childress, for appellant.

Joseph Donaldson, for respondent.

BROWN, J.

The facts in this case are as follows: The city of Northfield is a municipal corporation, created and existing under the provisions of chapter 17, p. 95, Sp. Laws 1875, and subsequent amendatory acts, with a population of about 3,000. Relator on the 14th day of June, 1904, filed with the city recorder an application for a license to sell intoxicating liquors within the city, with which was a bond in the penal sum of $2,000, in the form and conditioned as required in such cases by the ordinances of the city. He also paid to the city treasurer the sum of $1,200, the license fee fixed by the council for all licenses issued to applicants for the sale of intoxicating liquors. The application was in all respects in due form; notice of hearing thereon was given by the council, as required by law; but on the 1st of July, the time fixed for such hearing, the council refused to grant the license. No objections were made to relator on account of his character, and, for all that appeared, he was a fit and suitable person to whom a license might be granted. Upon these facts an alternative writ of mandamus was issued, requiring respondents to show cause why a license should not be issued to relator, to which respondents answered, setting up, among other things, after admitting substantially all the allegations of the writ, that the council, in refusing the license to relator, did so in the exercise of its discretion, as it had the right to do, and in accordance with the previous determination of the council to limit the number of saloons in the city to five; that prior to the consideration of relator's application five other applications had been considered and granted; and the reason for rejecting relator's application was that the council deemed it for the best interests of the people that there be no more than five licensed saloons in the city. To this answer relator demurred on the ground that the facts stated therein did not constitute a defense. The demurrer was overruled, and relator appealed.

By the act incorporating the city of Northfield the common council thereof was vested with full power ‘to restrain, control and regulate the selling and disposing of spirituous, vinous, malt, fermented, or intoxicating liquors within the said city, and may enforce the same by appropriate ordinances.’ Under the authority thus conferred, the common council of the city passed an ordinance entitled ‘An ordinance to regulate and restrain the traffic in intoxicating liquors.’ The first section provides that no person of persons shall sell, give away, or dispose of any intoxicating liquors within the limits of the city without first obtaining a license therefor. The second section provides that every person who shall apply to the common council for a license to sell intoxicating liquors, and whose application shall be approved by the council, shall be entitled to receive the same subject to the...