State ex rel. Jordan, Dist. Atty. v. Gilmer Grocery Co.

• Decision Date: 13 January 1930
• Docket Number: 27805
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE ex rel. JORDAN, DIST. ATTY., v. GILMER GROCERY CO

125 So. 710

156 Miss. 99

STATE ex rel. JORDAN, DIST. ATTY., v. GILMER GROCERY CO

No. 27805

Supreme Court of Mississippi

January 13, 1930

Division A

1. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. Statute should be so construed as to render it constitutional, if possible.

A statute should be so construed as to render it constitutional, if possible.

2. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. Statute will not be declared invalid unless It is clearly apparent it conflicts with organic law after resolving doubts in favor of validity.

A statute will not be declared invalid, unless it is clearly apparent that it conflicts with organic law after resolving all doubts in favor of its validity.

3. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. It is presumed Legislature making discriminations in classification in statutes bases them upon adequate grounds.

It is presumed that legislature understands and appreciates needs of people, and that its laws are aimed at conditions understood by them, experienced by them, and that when they make discriminations in classification they are based upon adequate grounds.

4. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. Monopolies. Statute forbidding unlawful combinations of cotton ginners does not violate equal protection clause because it is not all-embracing (Laws 1928 chapter 305; Constitution, United States Amendment 14).

Laws 1928, chapter 305, forbidding certain unlawful combinations of cotton ginners in restraint of trade, held not to violate equal protection clause, Constitution, United States Amendment 14, merely because it is not all-embracing.

5. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. Classification is valid where it proceeds upon any difference which has reasonable relation to object sought to be accomplished (Constitution United States Amendment 14).

A classification is valid, under Constitution, United States Amendment 14, wherever it proceeds upon any difference which has a reasonable relation to object sought to be accomplished, and difference need not be marked, but must be palpably arbitrary.

6 EVIDENCE. Supreme court takes judicial notice that cotton raising is principal industry in state and of conditions with reference to cotton raising.

Supreme court takes judicial notice of fact that cotton raising is principal industry in state; that millions of dollars are paid for cotton raised by people of state; that seed, when separated from cotton, have become very valuable in later years; that oil, together with many by-products, bring millions of dollars into state; that most of counties of state are agricultural; that there is not a balance of industrial projects within borders of state; and that most of population are directly affected by agricultural pursuit of cotton raising.

7. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. Statutes. Statute forbidding unlawful combinations of cotton ginners, dividing gin operators into two classes, those operating gins in one place and those operating gins in two or more places, held not invalid on ground classification is unreasonable (Laws 1928, chapter 305; Constitution, United States Amendment 14; Constitution, Mississippi 1890, section 87).

Laws 1928, chapter 305, forbidding certain unlawful combinations of cotton ginners in restraint of trade, dividing gin operators into two classes, those operating gins in one place and those operating gins in two or more places, held not to violate Constitution, United States Amendment 14, and Constitution, Mississippi 1890, section 87, on ground that classification is unreasonable and arbitrary.

8. STATUTES. Law is general when it operates uniformly on all members of class of persons, places, or things requiring legislation peculiar to that class (Constitution 1890, section 87).

Law is general in sense of Constitution 1890, section 87, when it applies to and operates uniformly on all members of any class of persons, places, or things requiring legislation peculiar to that particular class.

9. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. Statute forbidding unlawful combinations of cotton ginners does not contravene due process clause (Laws 1928, chapter 305; Constitution, United States Amendment 5; Constitution, Mississippi 1890, section 14).

Laws 1928, chapter 305, forbidding certain unlawful combinations of cotton ginners in restraint of trade, held not to contravene Constitution, United States Amendment 5, or Constitution, Mississippi 1890, section 14, relating to due process.

10. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. Supreme court will not consider constitutional question until it is actually presented.

Supreme court will not consider a constitutional question and decide it until it is actually presented.

HON. S. F. DAVIS, Judge.

APPEAL from circuit court of Sunflower county HON. S. F. DAVIS, Judge.

Action by the state, on the relation of Arthur Jordan, district attorney, against the Gilmer Grocery Company. From the judgment, the state appeals. Reversed and remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

Shands, Elmore & Causey, of Cleveland, for the state,

A constitutional classification for the purpose of legislation, must be a reasonable classification as opposed to that which is arbitrary, artificial, fanciful. A reasonable classification is one based on some differences bearing a reasonable and just relation to the act in respect to which the classification is proposed.

Ballard v. Oil Company, 81 Miss. 507, 557; Adams v. Standard Oil Company, 97 Miss. 879, 901; City of Jackson v. Mississippi Fire Insurance Company, 132 Miss. 415; Huggins v. Fire Ins. Co., 107 Miss. 662; State v. Speakes, 144 Miss. 125, 155-6; Moore Dry Goods Co. v. Roe, 97 Miss. 775; M. & O. R. R. Co. v. Brandon, 98 Miss. 461; Kiley v. Chicago, etc., 125 N.W. 464; Allen v. Bellingham, 163 P. 18; Adams v. Milwaukee, 129 N.W. 518; State v. Broadbelt, 43 A. 774; Ozane Lumber Co. v. Union County Bank, 52 L.Ed. 195; Quong Wing v. Kirkendall, 56 L.Ed. (U.S.) 350; Sammarco Company v. Boysa, 215 N.W. 446; Central Lumber Company v. South Dakota, 57 L.Ed. 164, 169; State v. Central Lumber Co., 123 N.W. 504, 511.

A gin business in its ordinary and usual operation is affected with public use.

Tallahassee Oil & Fertilizer Co. v. Holloway, 76 So. 434; Sec. 2908, Code of 1892; Hemingway's Code of 1927; State v. Edwards, 29 A. 946; Tyson v. Benton, 71 L.Ed. 723.

Forrest G. Cooper, of Indianola, for appellee.

The constitutions prohibit legislatures from singling out certain ones of a class to place restrictions on which are not equally applicable to others.

West Virginia v. Goodwill, 6 L.R.A. 621; Millett v. People, 117 Ill. 294, 5 West Rep. 155; Missouri v. Loomis, 115 Mo. 307, 21 L.R.A. 789; West Virginia v. Fire Creek Coal & Coke Co., 6 L.R.A. 359; Massachusetts v. Peery, 14 L.R.A. 325; Godcharies v. Wigeman, 4 Cent. Rep. 887, 113 Pa. 431; Baker v. Portland, 5 Sawy. 566; Ex parte Westerfield (1880), 55 Cal. 550, 36 Am. Rep. 47; Lafferty v. Chicago & W. M. R. Co., 71 Mich. 35; Schut v. Chicago & W. M. R. Co., 70 Mich. 433; St. Louis, I. M. & S. R. Co. v. Williams, 49 Ark. 492; San Antonio & A. P. R. Co. v. Wilson, 4 Tex. Civ. App. 322, 50 Am. & Eng. R. R. Cas. 513; Pasadena v. Stimson, 91 Cal. 238; 25 R. C. L., sec. 66, page 818; Smith v. State, 158 Ind. 543, 63 N.E. 25, 214, 64 N.E. 18; Edmonds v. Herbrandson (N. D.), 14 L.R.A. 725; McFarlane v. American Sugar Refining Co., 241 U.S. 79, 60 L.Ed. 899.

A law which unreasonably limits the freedom of contract is unconstitutional nor is such valid as an exercise of the police power where it unlawfully discriminates against some and not against all in that class.

Connolly v. Union Sewer Pipe Company, 184 U.S. 539, 46 L.Ed. 679; Nebraska v. Drayton, 23 L.R.A. (N.S.) 1287; 22 Am. & Eng. Ency. Law, 936; Mass. v. Boston Transcript Company, 144 N.E. 400, 35 A.L.R. 1; Adams v. Tanner, 244 U.S. 590, 61 L.Ed. 1336; Adkins v. Childrens' Hospital, 261 U.S. 525, 67 L.Ed. 785; Fairmont Creamery Company v. State of Minn., 274 U.S. 1, 71 L.Ed. 893; Mugler v. Kansas City, 123 U.S. 623, 31 L.Ed. 205; Merrick v. Hasley, 242 U.S. 568, 61 L.Ed. 498; Rast v. Van-Deman, 60 L.Ed. 679.

Watkins, Watkins & Eager, of Jackson, for appellee.

Chapter 305, Laws of 1928 of Mississippi, violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States in that the same deprives the appellee of the equal protection of the law, because: The right of a person or of a corporation to contract the price to be paid for a commodity or for which the commodity may be sold is one of those fundamental rights protected by the Constitution.

Truat v. Corrigan, 257 U.S. 312, 66 L.Ed. 254; Tyson v. Bantom, 273 U.S. 418, 71 L.Ed. 718; United States v. Cohen, 255 U.S. 81, 65 L.Ed. 516; Kennington v. Palmer, 255 U.S. 100, 65 L.Ed. 528; Williams v. Standard Oil Co. of Louisiana, 73 L.Ed. 141.

The law does not in its application and enforcement apply to all persons to substantial similarity with equal force and effect; Barbier v. Conolly, 112 U.S. 27, 28 Law Ed 923; Yick Wo. v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 30 L.Ed. 220; Henderson v. May, etc., of New York, 92 U.S. 259, 23 L.Ed. 450; and Ex parte Va., 100 U.S. 339, 25 L.Ed. 676; Neal v. Delaware, 103 U.S. 370, 26 L.Ed. 267; G. C. & S. F. R. R. Co. v. Ellis, 165 U.S. 150, 41 L.Ed. 666; Cotting v. Goddard, Atty.-Gen., 183 U.S. 79, 46 L.Ed. 92; Royster Guano Co. v. Virginia, 253 U.S. 412, 64 L.Ed. 989; Kentucky Finance Corp. v. Paramount Auto Exchange Corp. , 262 U.S. 544, 67 L.Ed. 1112; Airway Electric App. Corp. v. Day, Treas., State of Ohio et al., 69 L.Ed. 10; Hanover Fire Ins. Co. v. Carr, 272 U.S. 494, 71 L.Ed. 372; Power Mfg. Co. v. Saunders, 274 U.S. 490, 71 L.Ed. 1165; Quaker City Cab Co. v. Pennsylvania, 72 L.Ed. 927; Louisville Gas & Elec. Co. v. Coleman, 277 U.S. 32, 72 L.Ed. 770; Liggett Co. v. Attorney-General of Penn., 73 L.Ed. 45; Connolly v. Union Sewer Pipe Co., 184 U.S. 540; Great A. & P. Co. v. North Carolina,...