Fisher v. City of Paragould

• Citation: 192 S.W. 219,127 Ark. 268
• Decision Date: 12 February 1917
• Docket Number: 156
• Parties: FISHER v. CITY OF PARAGOULD
• Court: Supreme Court of Arkansas

192 S.W. 219

127 Ark. 268

FISHER v. CITY OF PARAGOULD

No. 156

Supreme Court of Arkansas

February 12, 1917

Appeal from Greene Circuit Court; R. H. Dudley, Judge; affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Huddleston Fuhr & Futrell, for appellant.

This appeal presents but one question, viz.: Is a house occupied by its owner as a residence, who lives alone, and to which no other females resort for immoral purposes, but to which men of lewd and lascivious character resort for the sole purpose of unlawful sexual intercourse with said owner, who is a woman, and where no other improper or immoral conduct is suffered or permitted, a bawdy house? The ordinance was not violated and appellant was not guilty under the agreed statement of facts. 14 Cyc. 484; 1 Idaho 689; 45 N.W. 545; 20 Am. St. 401; 1 Bishop New Cr. Law, 655; 38 Ark. 637. The house was not a bawdy house under the ordinance.

J. C Shane, for appellee.

Under the ordinance and agreed statement of facts the house of Annie Clark was a bawdy house, or house of ill-fame. 45 N.W 545; 80 Iowa 75; 84 Am. Dec. 175; 38 Ark. 638; 9 P. 508; 14 Cyc. 484; 96 Iowa 262; 48 Ark. 60.

OPINION

MCCULLOCH, C. J.

Appellant was convicted of violating an ordinance of the City of Paragould enacted for the purpose of suppressing bawdy houses. The ordinance in question makes it unlawful for any person to keep a bawdy house or to be an inmate thereof, or to frequent such a place, and defines a bawdy house to be a "house of ill-fame kept or used for the purpose of sexual prostitution and lewdness, whether kept or frequented by one female or more." The case was tried in the circuit court on an agreed statement of facts to the effect that appellant frequented the house of one Annie Clark, who was a prostitute, and who kept and used the house for her residence and for the purpose of sexual intercourse; that Annie Clark was the sole female inmate of the house and no other females resorted thereto for immoral purposes, but that "said house was at that time the resort of men of lewd and lascivious character, visiting said house for the sole purpose of unlawful sexual intercourse with said Annie Clark, and that no other immoral or improper conduct was therein suffered or permitted except as herein stated."

The contention of appellant is that the conviction is erroneous for the reason that, according to the undisputed facts, the house kept by Annie Clark being the place of her residence, and containing no other female inmate, was not a bawdy house within the correct definition of that term.

The municipality derived its sole authority to enact the ordinance from the statute which authorizes municipal corporations "to regulate or suppress bawdy or disorderly houses, houses of ill-fame or assignation." Kirby's Digest, section 5438. The statute itself does not define the terms bawdy house or houses of ill-fame or assignation, but those terms are used interchangeably as meaning substantially the same thing. A bawdy house according to the common law definition, is "a house of ill-fame kept for the resort and convenience of lewd people of both sexes." State v. Porter, 38 Ark. 637. Another definition is stated as follows: "A bawdy house, or house of ill-fame, is a house kept for the shelter and convenience of persons desiring unlawful sexual intercourse and in which...