City of Bozeman v. Cadwell

• Decision Date: 18 June 1894
• Parties: CITY OF BOZEMAN v. CADWELL.
• Court: Montana Supreme Court

36 P. 1042

14 Mont. 480

CITY OF BOZEMAN v. CADWELL.

Supreme Court of Montana

June 18, 1894

Appeal from district court, Gallatin county; F. K. Armstrong, Judge.

Prosecution by the city of Bozeman against E. P. Cadwell. From a judgment of conviction, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

W. F Davis, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment of conviction for practicing law without first having obtained a license. The proceeding was commenced in the police court of the city of Bozeman under the following ordinance of the city: "There shall be levied and collected by the city treasurer and collector from all persons engaged in the kinds of business hereinafter mentioned within the limits of the city of Bozeman a license tax as follows: *** (3) From each professional man, before practicing as such: All lawyers, dentists, physicians surgeons, and all other professions, insurance agents, real estate agents and notaries public, shall pay a license of one dollar ($1) per quarter. Provided that all persons who draw any legal instruments, deeds, power of attorney or other documents, for which he charges a fee, when the amount of fees for such services amount to thirty dollars ($30) per year, shall be considered a professional man. (4) Any person or persons, corporation or association who shall transact any business, trade, occupation or profession, for which a license is required by this ordinance, without first obtaining the same, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction, shall be fined in any sum not less than ten dollars ($10) nor more than one hundred dollars ($100) together with costs of prosecution." The portion of the complaint charging the offense is in the following language "That one E. P. Cadwell, from the first day of August, 1892, until the 26th day of April, 1893, at the city of Bozeman, in the county of Gallatin, state of Montana, and within the corporate limits of said city of Bozeman, did there and then transact and engage in the business or profession of a lawyer without first obtaining a license from said city therefor, and for which professional business a license was and is required by subdivision five of section one of Ordinance No. 86 of said city, entitled 'Concerning Licenses,' and passed August 27, 1891, in violation of section one of ordinance 86 of said city of Bozeman, entitled 'Concerning Licenses,' wherefore," etc. The defendant demurred to...