State v. Turner

• Decision Date: 07 February 1910
• Parties: STATE ex rel. OUSLEY v. TURNER et al., Judges of County Court.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

125 S.W. 531

141 Mo. App. 323

STATE ex rel. OUSLEY v. TURNER et al., Judges of County Court.

Kansas City Court of Appeals. Missouri.

February 7, 1910.

1. STATUTES (§ 188)—CONSTRUCTION.

The meaning of a statute must be collected, if possible, from the language used; but a construction which would lead to absurd or iniquitous results will not be adopted, unless compelled by the language.

2. INTOXICATING LIQUORS (§ 33)—LOCAL OPTION — SUBMISSION TO VOTERS — NOTICE OF ELECTION.

A notice of a local option election, published in a "newspaper in the county" as required by Rev. St. 1899, § 3029 (Ann. St. 1906, p. 1736), is valid where the circulation of the paper is such that it is best adapted to notify the voters, though it is not published in the territory to be affected.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Boone County; R. S. Ryors, Special Judge.

Mandamus by the State of Missouri, on the relation of G. W. Ousley, against C. C. Turner and others, Judges of the County Court, to compel them to issue a dramshop license. From a judgment refusing the writ, relator appeals. Affirmed.

Arthur Bruton, W. H. Rothwell, and Sebree, Conrad & Wendorff, for appellant. L. T. Searcy, F. G. Harris, and H. D. Murry, for respondents.

BROADDUS, P. J.

Mandamus. Relator's application for the writ is to compel respondents, judges of the county court of Boone county, to issue to him a license to conduct a dramshop in the city of Centralia. It is conceded that he is entitled to such license, unless the alleged adoption of the local option law outside of the city of Columbia, a city of more than 2,500 inhabitants, precludes him that privilege. Centralia, having less than 2,500 inhabitants, is governed by the local option law, if it has been legally adopted in the county of Boone.

Relator contends that the election for the adoption of said law was invalid, because there was no legal notice given for the holding of such election. The only notice given for said election was given in the Columbia Statesman, published in the said city of Columbia. At the time there were published in the county, outside of said city, newspapers at Hallsville, Sturgeon, Rocheport, Ashland and Hartsburg. The contention is that, in order to constitute a valid publication of the election, it should have been published in a newspaper within the territorial limits of that part of the county to be affected by the adoption of the law. Section 3029, Rev. St. 1899 (Ann. St. 1906, p. 1736), providing for notice...