Wendell v. State

• Decision Date: 03 February 1885
• Citation: 22 N.W. 435,62 Wis. 300
• Parties: WENDELL v. STATE.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

62 Wis. 300

22 N.W. 435

WENDELL

v.STATE.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Filed February 3, 1885.

Error to Milwaukee, municipal court.Henry L. Buxton and W. J. Turner, for plaintiff in error.

H. W. Chynoweth, Asst. Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.

TAYLOR, J.

This is a prosecution for the same offense as in the case of Raynor v. State, ante, 430; and in this case, as in that, the learned attorney general moves to dismiss the action on the ground that this court has no authority to issue a writ of error to review the judgment of the municipal court of Milwaukee in the class of cases to which this belongs. The motion in this case is overruled for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the case of Raynor v. State. In reaching the conclusion we have in this case, and in the case of Raynor v. State, we have not overlooked what was said by this court in the case of State v. Allison, 47 Wis. 548;S. C. 2 N. W. REP. 1141; nor are we disposed to overrule that case. We do not think that it follows logically that, because this court has no authority to review the opinions and decisions of the municipal court, in the class of actions to which the case at bar belongs, upon a report of the judge of the municipal court, this court may not review the judgments of such court upon a writ of error.

The statute giving the right to review the decisions and opinions of the circuit judges in criminal cases, upon a report made by them to this court before judgment, in its terms limits such right of review to cases pending before the circuit courts. See section 4720, Rev. St. And all that was determined by the decision in the case of State v. Allison was that this proceeding is “inapplicable” to cases of this class tried in the municipal court of Milwaukee. In the case at bar, and in Raynor v. State, we hold that, under the language of section 1, c. 256, Laws 1879,--which says “the judgments of the municipal court, in all cases tried before it, may be examined and reviewed by the supreme court in the same manner as the judgments of the circuit court may be,”--writ of error will run to such court to review its judgments; but this language is hardly comprehensive enough to give this court the right to review the opinions, directions, and judgments of the municipal court, made during the progress of the trial, upon a report made to this court before final judgment, as provided for in said section 4720, Rev. St. The review given to this court by the municipal court act, of judgments of the class of the one at bar, is a review of the final judgment of the court, and not of its opinions, etc., upon reports made to this court before final judgment. In cases of this kind the opinions, directions, and judgments of the municipal court, in any matter of law made during the progress of the trial, can only be reviewed upon writ of error, after final judgment and bill of exceptions settled as in civil actions. Whether, in a case tried in the municipal court upon information, indictment, or appeal from a justice court, this court would review the opinions, directions, and judgments of said court upon report made as provided in said section 4720, Rev. St., is not decided.

Upon the trial of this action in the municipal court, the accused, in order to justify his using the title of “doctor,” and to prefix such title to his name, offered in evidence what purported to be written articles of association of the Milwaukee College of Physicians and Surgeons. These articles recite that three men (naming them) “do hereby associate for the purpose of forming a corporation under the Revised Statutes of the state of Wisconsin, for the establishment, maintenance, and use of a college for giving instruction in the several branches of medical science, as ordinarily taught in the medical schools throughout the country, namely, anatomy, physiology, chemistry, materia medica, therapeutics, and the practice of medicine, surgery, and obstetrics.” The first article gives the name and location of the college; the second provides that it shall be a corporation without capital stock; the third designates what general officers there shall be, viz., a president, secretary, treasurer, dean, and a board of four directors; the fourth article defines the duties of the several officers; the fifth, the duties and powers of the board of directors; and the sixth provides for the first...