Town of Hillsboro v. Smith

• Decision Date: 29 April 1892
• Citation: 14 S.E. 972,110 N.C. 417
• Parties: TOWN OF HILLSBORO v. SMITH et al.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

14 S.E. 972

110 N.C. 417

TOWN OF HILLSBORO v. SMITH et al.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

April 29, 1892

Appeal from superior court, Orange county; E. T. BOYKIN, Judge.

Proceeding by the town of Hillsboro against John U Smith and others. From an order of the superior court granting plaintiff's application for a writ ofcertiorari to review the action of the board of county commissioners in granting a license to retail intoxicating liquors, defendant Smith appeals. Appeal dismissed.

Act 1891, c. 323, relative to granting licenses for the sale of liquor, provides that "the board of commissioners shall upon satisfactory evidence of good moral character of the applicants, issue the license * * * " Held, that such act does not deprive the board of commissioners of exercising a limited legal discretion in passing upon the application for a license, or of the right to take into consideration the question whether the demands of the public require an increase of such accommodations, and whether the place where it is proposed to establish a barroom is a suitable one.

J. W Graham, for appellant.

C. D Turner, for appellee.

SHEPHERD J.

The town of Hillsboro, by its duly-authorized attorney, appeared before the board of commissioners of the county of Orange and objected to the granting of a license by that body to one John U. Smith to retail intoxicating liquors in the said town. The board of commissioners ordered that a license be issued to the said Smith, and taxed the town with the costs of the proceeding. The town, having been thus treated as a party to the proceeding, very clearly had a right to have the action of the board of commissioners reviewed, and, as no appeal lies from that body in case like the present, the writ of certiorari was properly granted. We are also of the opinion that the order of the judge is not appealable, and that this appeal must be dismissed. Bank v. Burns, 107 N.C. 465; 12 S.E. Rep. 252. As the case is to be further heard in the court below, it is not improper that we should pass upon the questions presented upon the face of the petition. It is there stated that the board of commissioners considered that when the applicant, Smith, had shown a good moral character, it had no discretion whatever, but was compelled to grant him the license. The act of 1891 (chapter 323) provides that "the board of commissioners shall upon satisfactory evidence of good moral character of the...