Cent. Lumber Co. v. City of Waseca

• Citation: 152 Minn. 201,188 N.W. 275
• Decision Date: 19 May 1922
• Docket Number: No. 22778.,22778.
• Parties: CENTRAL LUMBER CO. v. CITY OF WASECA et al.
• Court: Supreme Court of Minnesota (US)

152 Minn. 201

188 N.W. 275

CENTRAL LUMBER CO.

v.CITY OF WASECA et al.

No. 22778.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

May 19, 1922.

Appeal from District Court, Waseca County; A. B. Childress, Judge.

Action by the Central Lumber Company against the City of Waseca and others, in which temporary injunction was denied, and the plaintiff appeals. Order affirmed.

Syllabus by the Court

The establishment of a municipal coal and wood yard is a public purpose; and the home rule charter of Waseca, authorizing it, does not violate the state Constitution (article 9, § 1), providing that taxes shall be levied and collected for public purposes, nor the Fourteenth Amendment.

There was no error in denying a temporary injunction against the enforcement of a weighing ordinance of the city upon the ground that it was arbitrary or unreasonable or otherwise invalid. H. M. Gallagher, of Waseca, for appellant.

Joseph N. Moonan, of Waseca, for respondents.

DIBELL, J.

This is an action to enjoin the city of Waseca from establishing and operating a municipal coal and wood yard, and from enforcing a weighing ordinance. The trial court denied a temporary injunction and the plaintiff appeals. The questions are:

(1) Whether the establishment of a municipal coal and wood yard is a public purpose for which taxes may be levied.

(2) Whether the weighing ordinance is arbitrary and unreasonable or otherwise invalid so that a temporary injunction against its enforcement should issue.

1. The charter in apt terms authorizes the city council ‘to establish and operate a municipal coal and wood yard and to purchase coal, wood and fuel and sell the same at retail to the inhabitants of the city,’ etc. The project is financed by taxation. The claim of the plaintiff is that the charter provision is unconstitutional. Section 1 of article 9 of the Constitution provides that taxes ‘shall be levied and collected for public purposes.’ The due process provision of the Fourteenth Amendment of the federal Constitution, although the amendment does not mention taxes, inhibits their imposition for private purposes. Green v. Frazier, 253 U. S. 233, 40 Sup. Ct. 499, 64 L. Ed. 878. The principle is fundamental in government that the power of taxation, though unrestrained in terms, cannot be exercised for other than a public purpose.

The question is whether the establishment of a municipal coal and wood yard is a public purpose. The constitutional validity of the charter is presumed. It is to be assumed that in framing their charter the people were informed of conditions, such as the sources of supply, the ability and disposition of dealers to care for local demands, and other relevant factors affecting the situation, and found that public necessities and conveniences were such that the establishment of a municipal fuel yard was a public purpose. They have the responsibility of their finding and the wisdom or folly of the policy which they authorize. Their determination of public purpose is not final. It is accorded weight; but finally the court must determine as a judicial question whether the purpose for which taxes are exacted is public.

Economic and industrial conditions are not stable. Times change. Many municipal activities, the propriety of which is not now questioned, were at one time thought, and rightly enough so, of a private character. The constitutional provision that taxes can be levied only for public purposes remains; but conditions which go to make a purpose public change.

In our judgment the establishment of a municipal fuel yard is a public purpose. It was so held in Laughlin v. City of Portland, 111 Me. 486, 90 Atl. 318,51 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1143, Ann. Cas. 1916C, 734, upon thorough consideration, and...