City of St. Charles v. Schulte, No. 24092.

• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
• Writing for the Court: Ragland
• Citation: 264 S.W. 654
• Parties: CITY OF ST. CHARLES ex rel. PALMER, City Collector, v. SCHULTE.
• Docket Number: No. 24092.
• Decision Date: 31 July 1924

264 S.W. 654 CITY OF ST. CHARLES ex rel. PALMER, City Collector,
v.
SCHULTE. No. 24092. Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 1. July 31, 1924.

Appeal from Circuit Court, St. Charles County; Edgar B. Woolfolk, Judge.

Action by the City of St. Charles, on the relation of Lyman L. Palmer, City Collector, "against William Schulte. From judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Emil P. Rosenberger, of Montgomery, for appellant.

Wm. F. Achelpohl, of St. Charles, for respondent.

RAGLAND, J.

This is an appeal by defendant from a judgment recovered against him by the city of St. Charles for an occupation tax imposed by one of its ordinances on vendors of soft drinks. The ordinance, so far as material to the questions involved in this controversy, was as follows:

"Section 69. Soft Drink Vendors. Any person, firm or corporation engaged in the business of selling or vending soft drinks or nonintoxicating liquors such as bottled sodas of any kind, or soda pop, Coca-Cola, ginger ale, or other drinks, or any near beer or so-called beverage made or manufactured wholly or in part from malt or malt substitute, whether sold in or from bottles or kegs or other containers, from or at any stand, store, stall or place of business in said city, and consumed, or to be consumed, at, in or near such stand, store, stall

264 S.W. 655

or place of business where sold, shall pay a license tax therefor, as follows:

"A. If selling or dealing in any such soft drinks and beverages other than near beer or beverages made or manufactured wholly or in part from malt or malt substitute, the sum of $25.00 per year.

"B. If, selling or dealing in any nonintoxicating near beers or so-called beverages made or manufactured wholly or in part from malt or malt substitutes, the sun of $180.00 per year.

"C. If selling or dealing in sodas and other soft drinks, as well as such near beers or non-intoxicating malt beverages as aforesaid, the sum of $200.00 per year.

"Provided, that nothing in this ordinance shall authorize any licensee or other person to sell or deal in intoxicating liquors of any kind."

Defendant was engaged in selling, in the city of St. Charles, soft drinks of all kinds, including "nonintoxicating near beers or so-called beverages made or manufactured wholly or in part from malt or malt substitutes." He paid to the city of St. Charles the license tax of $25, as provided in subdivision A of the ordinance, but refused to pay the additional sum required for selling near beers. Such refusal is the basis of this

The validity of the ordinance is challenged by appellant on two principal grounds: First the city of St. Charles was without authority to impose a license tax upon a vendor of near beers; and, second, the ordinance violates the constitutional requirement (section 3, art. 10) that taxes "shall be uniform upon the same class of subjects within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax."

St. Charles is a city of the third class. As such, it was expressly authorized by section 8322, R. S. 1919, "to levy and collect a license tax on * * * soft drink and ice cream stands and vendors." That "nonintoxicating near...