Hynes v. Briggs

• Decision Date: 01 January 1890
• Citation: 41 F. 468
• Parties: HYNES v. BRIGGS et al.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Arkansas

41 F. 468

HYNES v. BRIGGS et al.

United States Circuit Court, E.D. Arkansas.

January, 1890

This is an action by M. J. Hynes against W. H. Briggs and J. H Ferguson, for false imprisonment, and is submitted upon the following agreed statement of facts:

'Defendant Briggs is, and was at the date hereinafter mentioned, the sheriff of Howard county, Ark., and defendant Ferguson a justice of the peace in and for said county. Plaintiff is and was the general agent of the Wrought Iron Range Company, a foreign corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the state of Missouri, with headquarters in the city of St. Louis, Mo. Prior to the date of the filing of the affidavit set out in defendants' answer, plaintiff had been engaged in the sale and delivery of stove ranges in Howard county, Ark., as agent for the Wrought Iron Range Company, in the following manner: The stove ranges were shipped to Nashville, Ark., by the car-load, consigned to the Wrought Iron Range Company, and then stored by plaintiff in the railroad depot, which had been rented by plaintiff for that purpose. Plaintiff had many subagents under him in Howard and surrounding counties. Plaintiff sold stove ranges to various parties in Howard county sometimes upon written orders, and sometimes without any order, and delivered the ranges out of the stock on hand in the depot. Plaintiff's subagent, in one instance, is alleged to have sold the sample range from his wagon, and then and there delivered it to the purchaser. There were five car-loads of stove ranges. There were five separate car-loads of ranges shipped to Nashville from St. Louis, Mo., seventy-two to the car-load, and each car-load consigned to the Wrought Iron Range Company. Some orders were received for ranges before they were shipped, but these orders did not cover the number of ranges shipped. Plaintiff can give no estimate of the number of orders received before the shipment of the ranges. Defendant Briggs, as sheriff of Howard county, demanded of plaintiff his license to do business as agent for the stove-range company about two weeks before the arrest was made. He declined to pay any license. Defendant Briggs then consulted with W. M. Green, the prosecuting attorney for the eighth judicial circuit, including Howard county, as to his duty in the premises. Mr. Green advised the defendant Briggs to make complaint against plaintiff and his subagents for doing business as agent for the stove-range company without first procuring license, and prepared the affidavit which was made by defendant Briggs, and filed before defendant Ferguson, as set up in defendants' answer. Upon this affidavit a warrant was issued by defendant Ferguson, and placed in the hands of R. F. Tilson, deputy town marshal of Nashville, and by him executed. Plaintiff was arrested under this warrant by said deputy-marshal, and given an opportunity to make his bond, which was fixed by the defendant Ferguson at $250. This bond was made in about fifteen minutes, and plaintiff was released from custody forthwith. Plaintiff was not restrained of his liberty other than this. The deputy-marshal accompanied him while he procured his bond. With reference to the sale and delivery of the sample range, E. F. Moles and G. D. Hodge will both testify that J. E. Keener, a subagent under plaintiff, told them, before the warrant was issued, that he (Keener) made more sales than any of the rest of the boys; that he had even sold the sample range off of his wagon and delivered it. Plaintiff denies that he ever sold, or authorized the sale of, a single sample range from the wagon. Plaintiff further says that until the ranges were sold and delivered they remained the property of the Wrought Iron Range Company, and plaintiff had no interest in them except as agent to sell and deliver. Plaintiff alleges that his subagents sold the ranges, and took the purchasers' notes therefor, subject to the approval of plaintiff. If plaintiff saw fit to confirm the sale, he delivered to the purchaser the range from his stock at Nashville, and took the purchaser's receipt therefor. One of the blanks is hereto attached.'

U. M. & G. B. Rose, for plaintiff.

Scott & Jones, for defendants.

CALDWELL J., (after stating the facts as above.)

The plaintiff was agent in this state for the Wrought Iron Range Company, a Missouri corporation. Section 5589, Mansf. Dig., provides that--

'There shall be levied and collected, as a state tax, the sum of one-hundred dollars upon each and every clock peddler, each and every agent for the sale of lightning rods, and stove-range agents, doing business in this state for the term of one year or less.'

The plaintiff refused to pay the state tax mentioned in this section; and thereupon the defendants instituted a prosecution against him under section 5594, Mansf. Dig., and arrested and detained him as set out in the agreed statement of facts. The plaintiff claims that his arrest was illegal upon the ground that the act of the legislature quoted is void because it conflicts with that clause of the constitution of the United States which confers on congress the power to regulate commerce between the states, and that it is also repugnant to the constitution of the state. The supreme court of the United States, in recent cases, have defined what is and what is not 'interstate commerce' with considerable precision. It is settled by the decisions of that court that the sale of...