Park v. Morgan

Decision Date10 December 1912
Citation60 So. 347,64 Fla. 414
PartiesPARK v. MORGAN, City Tax Collector.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

Error to Circuit Court, Orange County; J. W. Perkins, Judge.

Mandamus on the relation of C. W. Park, doing business as the C. W Park Dramatic Company, against W. L. Morgan, City Tax Collector of the City of Sanford, Orange County. From a judgment denying the writ, the relator brings error. Affirmed.

Syllabus by the Court

SYLLABUS

Where under the authority conferred upon the city of Sanford, an ordinance was passed imposing license taxes upon businesses and occupations, and, among others, the following: 'All small shows other than circuses, either theatrical or vaudeville, given within tents, whether covered or uncovered or given in any temporary inclosure, for each day, twenty-five dollars ($25.00)'--such an ordinance is not unconstitutional as being an improper and unjust classification, nor as denying the equal protection of the laws, nor as being unwarrantedly discriminatory.

COUNSEL John E. & Julian Hartridge, of Jacksonville, for plaintiff in error.

Geo. A. De Cottes, of Sanford, for defendant in error.

OPINION

HOCKER J.

On the 12th of January, 1912, the relator, C. W. Park, applied to W. L. Morgan, city tax collector of the city of Sanford, in Orange county, for a theater license in the following language:

'We, through our business manager, herewith present our request for a theater license and accompany same with $12.50, the lawful fee under the ordinances of the city of Sanford and the state of Florida, making this a tender of the said license fee, and ask that you, as city tax collector, issue said license to the undersigned company, and oblige.
'[Signed] C. W. Park Dramatic Company,
'By M. E. Wheelan, Business Manager.'

The license was refused, and mandamus brought by relator.

It appears that the city of Sanford had passed an ordinance charging 50 per cent. of the state license tax for 'theater building fitted with scenery and kept for theatrical and other exhibitions.' The state license is fixed at $25 per year for cities of 2,000 to 5,000 inhabitants (Acts of 1907, c. 5597, p. 55), and the second section of the same chapter confers upon counties, incorporated cities, and towns the power to impose 50 per cent. of the above tax, and says: 'But such city or town may impose taxes on any business profession or occupation not mentioned in this act when engaged in or managed within such county, city or town.' On the same page (55) will be seen the following: 'Theatrical shows or traveling players and minstrels other than those taxed as circuses, for each performance in cities or towns of ten thousand or more inhabitants, $25.00. Less than ten thousand inhabitants, fifteen dollars.' Then follows a proviso 'that managers of theaters or halls employing traveling troupes, theatrical, operatic or minstrel, giving performances in buildings fitted up for such purpose shall be allowed to give as many performances in such building or theater as they wish on payment of the following license: * * * In cities or towns of five to ten thousand inhabitants, fifty dollars per annum,' etc. On page 53 of the act it will be seen that 'shows or circuses exhibiting or giving a performance within tents, whether covered or uncovered, with or without horses, in cities of ten thousand inhabitants or more, one hundred dollars. Less than ten thousand inhabitants and more than five thousand, fifty dollars.' These quotations are made to show the method of the Legislature in classifying the different kinds of theatrical exhibitions, shows, etc., and fixing license rates.

The city of Sanford, on the 16th of October, 1911, also passed the following ordinance:

'An Ordinance Imposing Certain License Taxes.

'Be it ordained by the mayor and city council of Sanford:

'Section 1. That the license tax hereinafter mentioned shall be paid to the city of Sanford by the persons engaged in managing and transacting the several businesses or occupations hereinafter mentioned, to wit: Moving picture shows ($15.00) fifteen dollars. Street carnivals, street shows, street performances or exposition companies for each tent, booth or other structure, and for each day, ten dollars ($10.00). All small shows other than circuses, either theatrical or vaudeville, given within tents, whether covered or uncovered, or given in any temporary inclosure, for each day twenty-five dollars ($25.00).

'Sec. 2. Contractors contracting for buildings, erection or construction of buildings, dwellings, warehouses or other structures, fifty ($50.00) dollars. Bill posting, and for the tacking of display cards for advertising, five ($5.00) dollars. Agents for clothiers and tailors taking orders from sample books or catalogues for cloth or men's, women's and children's clothing, not otherwise taxed as merchants, and not having an established place of business and legitimately engaged in the clothing, tailoring, dry-goods or haberdashery business, fifty ($50.00) dollars. Pressing clubs for the cleaning and pressing of clothes, dependent for its existence on a collective number of persons or members, making a flat rate or charge for a certain stipulative period of time for work done, and not charging for work by the piece, twenty-five ($25.00) dollars.

'Sec. 3. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

'I hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was duly passed by the city council in session October 16, 1911.

'[Signed] M. W. Lovell,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • State v. Quigg
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • 6 Diciembre 1927
    ...they can plainly see that the same was without warrant in the facts.' See, also, Jackson v. Neff, 64 Fla. 326, 60 So. 350; Park v. Morgan, 64 Fla. 414, 60 So. 347, Harrison v. Big Four Bus Lines, supra. In Davis v. City of Houston, supra, the court says: 'In our own state the question has b......
  • O'connell v. Kontojohn
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • 16 Marzo 1938
    ...facts. Plaintiff in error contends that the ordinance should be upheld under Hardee v. Brown, 56 Fla. 377, 47 So. 834; Park v. Morgan, 64 Fla. 414, 60 So. 347; and Freeman v. Tittsworth, 126 Fla. 483, 171 307. There were elements that entered into the decision of these cases that are not sh......
  • State Ex Rel. Southern Roller Derbies, Inc. v. Wood
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • 13 Diciembre 1940
    ... ... 641, 188 So. 758; Ex parte Smith, 100 ... Fla. 1, 128 So. 864; State ex rel. James v. Gerrell, ... 137 Fla. 324, 188 So. 812; Park v. Morgan, 64 Fla ... 414, 60 So. 347; Pellicer v. Sweat, Sheriff, 131 ... Fla. 60, 179 So. 423; Greenleaf & Crosby Co., Inc., v ... Coleman, ... ...
  • Hiers v. Mitchell
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • 22 Febrero 1928
    ...any tax whatsoever, and that the said tax is therefore based on an unreasonable and arbitrary classification. This court, in Park v. Morgan, 64 Fla. 414, 60 So. 347, with approval from Peninsular Industrial Insurance Co. v. State, 61 Fla. 376, 55 So. 398, say: '(1) The equal protection clau......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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