Clark v. Daniel
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Fulton Circuit Court; John W. Meeks, Judge; Parties showing good reason therefor should .be permitted to withdraw their names from the petition. 40 Ark. 291. The proceeding was in the nature of an election, and it should have been tried by the circuit court upon the issues made by petitioners before the county court. 51 Ark. 159; 70 Ark. 175. Where the original signatures were obtained intelligently and without fraud, and have not been erased before presentation,…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Fulton Circuit Court; John W. Meeks, Judge; Parties showing good reason therefor should .be permitted to withdraw their names from the petition. 40 Ark. 291. The proceeding was in the nature of an election, and it should have been tried by the circuit court upon the issues made by petitioners before the county court. 51 Ark. 159; 70 Ark. 175. Where the original signatures were obtained intelligently and without fraud, and have not been erased before presentation, they will hot be permitted to withdraw their names. 70 Ark. 175, and cases cited; 75 Ark. 155.
1Opinion of the CourtBattle, J.
On the second day of January, 1905, F. M: Daniel and 316 other adult inhabitants, residing within three miles of the public schoolhouse in the town of Mammoth Spring,' in Fulton County, in this State, presented a petition to the Fulton County Court, asking that an order be made prohibiting the sale or giving away of vinous, spirituous or intoxicating liquors of any kind, including alcohol, or any compound or preparation thereof com'monly called bitters, within three miles of the schoolhouse,. for the period provided by law.
The county court denied the petition. An appeal was taken by the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bordwell v. DillsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1902
3Cited by2 opinions
- Phillips v. GoeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
- Alexander v. PhilpotSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1914