City of Shreveport v. Wilson

• Decision Date: 03 November 1919
• Docket Number: 23616
• Citation: 83 So. 186,145 La. 906
• Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
• Parties: CITY OF SHREVEPORT v. WILSON et al. In re WILSON et al

83 So. 186

145 La. 906

CITY OF SHREVEPORT v. WILSON et al.

In re WILSON et al

No. 23616

Supreme Court of Louisiana

November 3, 1919

Charles F. Crane, of Shreveport, for relators.

OPINION

O'NIELL, J.

The defendants, relators in this proceeding, were prosecuted in the city court of Shreveport, on an affidavit charging that they had occupied a room in the city 'for the purpose of prostitution and assignation and for other lewd and indecent acts,' in violation of Municipal Ordinance No. 18333. Having been convicted and sentenced to pay a fine or be imprisoned, they appealed to the First Judicial District Court, parish of Caddo, where the case was tried de novo, and the conviction and sentence were affirmed. The case is before us on a writ of certiorari.

Before pleading to the charge, defendants filed a demurrer contending that the municipal ordinance was unconstitutional null and void, in so far as it purported to denounce as an offense the occupying or using of a house or room 'for other lewd or indecent acts,' other than prostitution or assignation; because the ordinance does not define any other act of indecency or lewdness.

The demurrer was overruled, and, a bill of exception having been taken to the ruling, the case was submitted on the following statement of facts, viz.: That defendants lived together, for a year or longer, as man and wife, but were not married; that they rented the house and occupied it alone; that the woman, E. Gardner, lived only with the man, Harry Wilson; that they thus lived together openly in a residence part of the city, at the number and on the street mentioned in the charge; and that it was generally known that they were not married.

The only question thus presented is whether the municipal ordinance has application to the facts stated.

Our opinion is that the ordinance is not applicable. Its preamble shows plainly that it was intended, as a war measure, merely to protect the health and morals of the soldiers in and about the city, by abolishing houses of prostitution and assignation. The ordinance is as follows:

'An Ordinance.

'Suppressing and closing all houses of prostitution or assignation, making it unlawful to keep, conduct, operate or maintain any house of prostitution or assignation within the corporate limits of the city of Shreveport; prohibiting the use of any hotel, house, apartment, room or place for the purpose of prostitution or assignation or other lewd or indecent act; providing a penalty for the violation of this ordinance and repealing all ordinances in conflict herewith.

'Whereas the United States is engaged in war and an army is being raised in this city and parish; and,

'Whereas, it is necessary that the health and morals of the soldiers drawn from this city and vicinity be safeguarded and protected; and,

'Whereas, houses of prostitution and assignation are a menace to the welfare and injurious to the health and morals of the soldiers (or army), and the public generally, and the public safety and tranquility require that they be closed and suppressed; and,

'Whereas, all houses used for purposes of prostitution or assignation are public nuisances and should be abated;

'Now, therefore, by virtue of the authority vested in this body by law and in the exercise of the police power of this municipality:

'Section 1. Be it enacted by the city council of the city of Shreveport, in legal session assembled, that all houses rooms, apartments, or other places of any kind or character whatever within the corporate limits of the city of Shreveport, used for the purpose of prostitution or assignation of other lewd or indecent act, whether situated in a district heretofore established, or elsewhere, be and the same are hereby ordered closed and suppressed for such...