State Racing Commission v. Latonia Agricultural Ass'n

• Decision Date: 10 December 1909
• Citation: 123 S.W. 681
• Parties: STATE RACING COMMISSION v. LATONIA AGRICULTURAL ASS'N.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

123 S.W. 681

STATE RACING COMMISSION v. LATONIA AGRICULTURAL ASS'N.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

December 10, 1909

Appeal from Circuit Court, Kenton County, Common Law and Equity Division.

"To be officially reported."

Action by the Latonia Agricultural Association against the State Racing Commission. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions to dismiss.

McQuown & Beckham and J. Morgan Chinn, for appellant.

Harvey Myers, for appellee.

O'REAR J.

This appeal involves the construction and constitutionality of the act of March 23, 1906 (Laws 1906, p. 466, c. 137), entitled "An act to regulate the racing of running horses in the commonwealth of Kentucky, and to establish a state racing commission and prescribing its powers and duties." By section 1 of the act it is provided that corporations "formed for the purpose of racing and breeding, or improving the breed of horses and conducting races and contests of speed, shall have the power and right, subject to the provisions of this act, to hold one or more running race meetings, in each year, and to hold, maintain and conduct running races at such meetings." By the second section it is provided that the state racing commission shall consist of five persons, three of whom shall be breeders of thoroughbred stock, and no two of whom shall be members of the same racing association; and by the third section it is provided that: "Said commission shall have the power to prescribe rules, regulations and conditions under which running races shall be conducted in this state, and no races shall be conducted except by a corporation or association duly licensed by said commission." It is provided that associations which desire to conduct racing shall annually apply to "the state racing commission for a license to so to do. If in the judgment of the commission a proper case for the issuance of such license is shown, it may grant the same for a term of one year; and every such license shall contain a condition that all races or race meetings conducted thereunder, shall be subject to the rules regulations and conditions, from time to time prescribed by the commission, and shall be revocable by the commission for every violation thereof, or whenever the continuance of such license shall be deemed, by the commission, not conductive to the interest of legitimate racing." It was also provided that the decision and action of the commission in these matters shall be subject to the review of a court of competent jurisdiction. By section 4 of the act it is provided that running race meetings, at which racing is permitted for stakes, except as allowed by this act, are public nuisances, punishable by a fine of not less than $500 nor more than $1,000 for each day such racing is conducted. Section 5 exempts from the operation of the act trotting races, and races conducted by state, county, or other fair associations, holding only one meeting annually for not exceeding six days. The state racing commission adopted a rule prohibiting gambling on the tracks by bookmaking, and in the order announced that it deemed such form of gambling not conductive to the interest of legitimate racing. The "Paris Mutual" and auction pool systems of betting at the tracks were recommended. Thereafter the appellee applied for and obtained a license for conducting races on its track at Latonia, containing all the conditions required by the act as aforesaid, and with notice of the regulation made by the commission against book making, and further notice of the order of the Commission that it would deem a violation thereof sufficient ground for revoking the license of any association so offending. Thereafter, at its meeting in October, the appellee allowed to be installed and operated at its tracks the system of gambling known as bookmaking and, upon receiving official notice thereof, the commission revoked appellee's license. Thereupon appellee instituted this action in the Kenton circuit court, and sought an injunction against appellants to prevent them from interfering with the operation of racing on its track, on the ground that the act creating the commission was unconstitutional, and that the regulation concerning bookmaking was ultra vires.

The court below held the act unconstitutional in two respects:

(1) The Legislature had no authority to delegate to the commission the power to make the regulation complained of.

(2) The act is a class legislation, and therefore void, because trotting races are exempt from its operation.

The intention of the Legislature in the enactment of the bill was in our opinion to foster a great industry in this state, one which has gained for the state much celebrity, and which has been a source of considerable profit to the breeders of thoroughbred horses. The object of government is to conserve the public welfare. This is done by promoting legitimate occupations and industries, as well as by checking evils that have an immoral tendency. From the earliest history of the commonwealth to the present it has been deemed a proper exercise of governmental power to foster and protect business enterprises within the state and particularly the interests of agriculture and stock raisers. It will be noted that tobacco culture, and the sale of tobacco, the protection of the health and the promotion of the pure breeds of live stock, even the protection of Kentucky's product of pure whisky, have all been the subject of legislative protection. As to live stock interests, beginning with the scalp laws, when Kentucky was a wilderness infested with wild beasts, down to the creation of the State Fair Association by a recent Legislature, and including quarantine regulations, the dog tax law (held to have been a protective measure for sheep husbandmen), and the act now in question, the concern of the Legislature has been to protect and promote breeding industries in live stock within this state. Given that the subject is one for the legitimate exercise of the state's police power, then the means adopted by the Legislature, so long as it has an ascertainable relevancy to the object, is clearly within the scope of that power. Whether the end justifies the means is exclusively for the legislative discretion. Whether the means bear a pertinent and reasonable relation to the end may be looked into by the courts so far only as to determine the fact of pertinency and reasonableness. Only when the means adopted are manifestly unreasonable and oppressive, or bear no logical relation to the object of the legislation, are the courts at liberty to declare the act unconstitutional. The act now in question does not in terms declare its purpose. To ascertain it, recourse may be had, indeed must be, to concurrent and past history of the people and conditions, that the court may sit in the light of the enactors of the statute in determining what was in the legislative mind. The horse has always been, particularly among Caucasian peoples, "the friend, companion, and servant of man." In war he was well-nigh an indispensable factor. In peace, even more so. For many centuries he afforded the principal means of travel. By reason of his strength and docility, he enabled the husbandman to profitably till the soil, and move his crops to market. He was the carrier of freight as well as passengers. He bore his master on his journeys of business and state, and his mistress on her missions of worship and social duty. Whether as a charger bearing the knight, or the palfrey, my lady, or old Dobbin at the plough, he was more or less constantly associated with man as his dependable servant, intelligent companion, and "friend in need." It is no wonder he had the care and attention prompted by gratitude, pride, and self-interests. He needs be a good horse to well serve a busy master. Selection naturally followed from observation of desirable qualities; the best being kept to perpetuate their kind. He excelled his contemporaries, the ox and the ass, not so much in strength, as in speed, beauty, and endurance. His capabilities were more extensive. Living without recreation would be a hard, if not unnatural, lot. Even the Puritans found it so. The innocent amusements of a people are proper subjects of encouragement. If the old adage be true that "all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy," it is equally true that all play and no work makes Jack a poor man. The happy medium is the safest lot. Among the recreations of the English speaking people for many centuries has been that of horse racing. It takes a good horse to run a good race. These tests of strength, fleetness, endurance, and intelligence have been the means by which the quality of the horse has been established. The constant association in business, labor, and pleasure with this noble animal has been so long with our people that it has grown to be a part of their nature. Whatever our origin, whether English, who loves the thoroughbred, Irish, who developed the Hobbie, or Scot, who gave the world the useful Galloway, or the people just south of the channel who made a specialty of the heavy draft breeds, we have no complete history without mention of the kinds, uses, and quality of the horse. That he has contributed so much to pleasure, including harmless amusement, detracts nothing from his service to mankind. Notwithstanding we now live in an age of machinery and of mechanical motors, the horse has lost none of his ancient hold upon the admiration of men, and is found to be as much in demand, if not as indispensable, as ever he was. Nothing that has been and is yet the subject of such general interest and utility can be regarded as beyond the legitimate concern of the legislator.

Thoroughbred horses, so called, have been bred and used...