Schmidt v. People

Decision Date07 November 1892
Citation18 Colo. 78,31 P. 498
PartiesSCHMIDT v. PEOPLE.
CourtColorado Supreme Court

Error to criminal court, Arapahoe county.

Julius F. Schmidt was convicted of violating a statute providing for the inspection of fresh meat, and appeals. Reversed.

Syllabus by the Court

The act of March 21, 1889, concerning the inspection, before slaughter, of certain animals intended for human food, is in violation of the constitution of the United States in so far as such act provides that fresh meats, sound, healthy, and fit for human food, cannot lawfully be shipped into this state to be sold except upon condition that the animal or animals from which such meats have been taken shall have been inspected and certified as provided by said statute. This decision is based upon a decision by the supreme court of the United States.

Teller & Orahood, George W. McCrary, and Hugh Butler, for plaintiff in error.

Joseph H. Maupin, Atty. Gen., for the People.

PER CURIAM.

There is no controversy as to the facts of this case. Plaintiff in error was indicted and convicted in the criminal court of Arapahoe county for the violation of a certain act of the general assembly of the state of Colorado entitled 'An act to provide for the inspection, before slaughter, of certain animals, the meat of which is intended to be sold, or offered for sale, as human food, and to prescribe penalties for the violations of the provisions of this act.' See Sess. Laws 1889, p. 244. The provisions of said act necessary to an understanding of the case are as follows 'Section 1. No person shall sell, or offer for sale, as an article of human food, within this state, except as provided in section 9 hereof, the fresh meat of any neat cattle, swine, or sheep of any description, unless the animal has been inspected and accepted in the manner hereinafter provided. Sec. 2. That the county commissioners of the several counties of this state shall, on or before the first day of August, 1889, and on or before the first day of August of each year thereafter, appoint one or more meat inspectors in each village, town, and city thereof, (and elsewhere in their respective counties, if deemed necessary,) who shall be known and designated as 'live stock meat inspectors,' and who shall hold their respective offices for the period of one year, and until their successors are appointed and qualified. * * * Sec. 3. That it shall be the duty of an inspector to view and inspect every head of cattle, sheep and swine to be slaughtered within the limits of the village town, city, or county wherein he has been appointed, and to be offered for sale as human food within the limits of the state of Colorado, within forty-eight hours before said slaughtering; and, if found healthy, sound, free from taint of disease, and in good condition, to certify the same to the owner or holder thereof, giving the date and hour of inspection, the number, marks, brands, and such other particulars of the animal or animals as he may deem necessary, retaining a copy of such certificate in a book kept by himself for the purpose,' etc. 'Sec. 8. Any person who shall sell or offer for sale as human food the flesh of any animal belonging to any of the classes mentioned in this act, which animal has not been inspected within this state before killing, as hereinbefore provided, and certified to be sound, free from disease, and in good condition, shall, for each offense, upon conviction, be punished by a fine not less than fifty dollars nor more than one hundred dollars. Sec. 9. Nothing in this act shall apply to or in any manner affect neighborhood slaughtering and sales in rural districts.' At the trial in the criminal court it was made to appear as a fact that the animal or animals, to wit, certain neat cattle, the meat of which was offered for sale by defendant...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • State v. Duckworth
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • 18 Diciembre 1897
    ... ... Barber, 136 U.S. 313, 10 S.Ct. 862; Brimmer v ... Rebman, 138 U.S. 78, 10 S.Ct. 213; Voight v ... Wright, 141 U.S. 62, 11 S.Ct. 855; Schmidt v ... People, 18 Colo. 78, 31 P. 498; Farris v ... Henderson, 1 Okla. 384, 33 P. 380, 382. A statute may, ... upon its face, apply equally to ... ...
  • People v. Morgan
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court
    • 24 Mayo 1926
    ... ... 158, 39 S.Ct. 35, 63 L.Ed ... By ... counsel for defendant in error: State v. Duckworth, 5 Idaho ... 642, 51 P. 456, 39 L.R.A. 365, 95 Am.St.Rep. 199; State v ... Butterfield Live Stock Co., 17 Idaho 441, 106 P. 455, 26 ... L.R.A. (N. S.) 1224, 134 Am.St.Rep. 263; Schmidt v. People, ... 18 Colo. 78, 31 P. 498; Voight [79 Colo. 511] v. Wright, 141 ... U.S. 62, 11 S.Ct. 855, 35 L.Ed. 638; Standard Oil Co. v ... Graves, 249 U.S. 389, 39 S.Ct. 320, 63 L.Ed. 662; Texas Co ... v. Brown (D. C.) 266 F. 577, 258 U.S. 467, 42 S.Ct. 375, 66 ... L.Ed. 566; Pittsburgh, C ... ...
  • State v. Chicago Great Western Railroad Co.
    • United States
    • Minnesota Supreme Court
    • 1 Mayo 1914
    ... ... Swift v. Sutphin, 39 F. 630, 3 L.R.A ... 238, 12 Am. St. 730; Minnesota v. Barber, 136 U.S ... 313, 10 S.Ct. 862, 34 L.Ed. 455; Schmidt v. People, ... 18 Colo. 78, 31 P. 498; Brimmer v. Rebman, 138 U.S ... 78, 11 S.Ct. 213, 34 L.Ed. 862; Harvey v. Huffman, ... 39 F. 646; Ex parte ... ...

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