City of St. Paul v. Stultz

Citation33 Minn. 233,22 N.W. 634
PartiesCITY OF ST. PAUL v STULTZ.
Decision Date19 February 1885
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota (US)

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from a judgment of the municipal court of the city of St. Paul.

W. P. Murray, for respondent, City of St. Paul.

J. T. James, for appellant, J. W. Stultz.

DICKINSON, J.

The defendant was convicted upon a criminal prosecution for peddling clocks in the city of St. Paul, without having a license to engage in such business, in violation of an ordinance of the city. The prohibitory part of the ordinance is as follows:

Section 1. Every person who shall sell, or offer for sale, any goods, wares, or merchandise, books, machinery, or other articles of value, or to barter or exchange the same, at any place upon, along, or through the streets, avenues, alleys, or other public places of this city, shall be deemed a peddler; and it shall not be lawful for any such person or persons to exercise their calling without first having obtained a license for that purpose.”

The evidence showed that the defendant was engaged in peddling clocks in the city, but it did not show that he was selling his goods, or offering to sell them, in any street or other public place. Therefore the defendant was not guilty of any offense, unless the mere fact of peddling such goods within the city, without a license, constituted an offense under this ordinance. This was the extent of what was charged against the defendant, and the respondent seems to rest the case upon the theory that this constituted a violation of the ordinance, and a criminal offense. We therefore assume, for the purposes of the determination of this case, that the ordinance was intended, not merely to forbid the prosecution of this business without license in the streets or other public places of the city, but generally and anywhere within the corporate limits. What we shall further say will be understood as having reference to this assumption.

The charter of the city contains no specific grant of authority to enact ordinances requiring peddlers to procure licenses to authorize them to engage in such business. It is only by virtue of section 16, c. 93, Sp. Laws 1881, that authority is claimed to have been conferred upon the common council to enact such an ordinance. That section is as follows: “The common council of the city of St. Paul, in addition to its other powers, is hereby authorized to ordain such other and further ordinances, not inconsistent with the laws of the state, which shall be deemed expedient for the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT