Show OPINION OF or THE SUPREME COURT 4 s y t I the fallo following wing was rendered 1 yes yea the supreme court in the supreme court of utah territory june term 1877 salt lake city respondent va henry wagner appellant appeal from the third district court boreman J delivered the opinion of the court justice of the peace of salt lake Cit yand judgment was had against the defendant for 20 for violation of a city ordinance providing for licensing and regulating the manufacture and sale of spirituous and fermented liquors the court affirmed the judgment of jus justice tice and thereupon the defendant appealed to this court the appellant denies the right the city to require him to take out pay a per quarter for selling beer his business being situated at a distance from the settled portions of the city the city requires the defendant to pay it per quarter for this sum thus required of the defendant the city should grant an equivalent to defendant it does not appear that any such equi equivalent is granted simply under a clause therefore there foie of the charter authorizing the city to license regulate and restrain the business the city la Is not authorized to enact the fee or duty specified as the benefits to the parties must be reciprocal but it is claimed that such power is granted to the city as a part of 0 its general police regulations if therefore such power is for the health safety and happiness of the inhabitants of said city and for the peace good order regulation and cleanliness thereof charter ito it has been granted A municipal corporation is one investing the people of a place with the local government thereof the local government cannot be said to include that which is not local ocal nor in any way concerns the local afra affair irs irp As applicable to a case like the one at bar the police regulations are to restrain the noxious use of private property or business to the injury of the people of the city to whom it is ia a source of harm interfering with the health 11 safety or happiness of xe the inhabitants ta taits tants its of said city or the 69 peace good order regul tion or cleanliness thereof asa As a general proposition the sale of fermented liquors as a beverage is injurious to uhe the public at large it is not specially detrimental to a city over and above the general public unless it be within the settled portions of the city or so near thereto as to cast its influence over the city more than over the public generally the influence of the sale of intoxicating liquors at any point in the territory is unwholesome to the public at large but we could not beju be justified stifled in saying say ing that such influence was specially injurious to any particular locality unless it was contiguous or very nearly ho to such locality unless we could say imy this we would not bo justified in saying that the city could control it by reason redson of its general police powers the defendants place of business was remote from the populated parts parta of salt lake city the camp douglas military reservation two miles square lay between it and the settled parts of the city and no streets lots jots or blocks are in the neighborhood of his place of business but farming and grazing lands surround it and the ground is no part of that embraced in the townsite entry of the city it does not appear that any supervision was taken over the pla pia placebo place ceby by the city except to claim the license fees or charges charge and no lad effects of the business are shown to have extended to the the locality is tod remote for the court to conclude from the general bad character of oatlie the tho business that thead effects extended more to the city than to the tho public generally the kentucky case of falmouth vs watson 5 bush la is the case mainly relied upon by the respondent in that case it appears that the statute gave the city of faim falm falmouth euth authority to control the business of selling intoxicating drinks within ono one mile of the city and the court fald taid that this law jaw did not infringe any constitutional tu dional right because 50 the thel vending of ardent spirits was in iii 11 uch such proximity to the town as to 1 ender tender its ins liable to affect the good order or peace of the local community but we do not think that said language could be used in the it would be straining the law too much but it would be necessary to say this in sustaining the judgment cecon we consider that the city would be affected as apart a pard part of the general public and the general public had given his authority through the county courts from which he held his license we theae therefore fore do not feel j justified in saying that the city had tn to ar or es specified the place of bf business being too remote from the settled portion of the city the judgment 0 of f the district court is therefore oven ovin overruled ruled with costs C J dissents and reserves the right to file his bis opinion emerson er nerson J concurs and may hereafter nife file a concurring opinion showing additional grounds |