State v. Fairbanks, No. 8045.

CourtSupreme Court of South Dakota
Writing for the CourtPOLLEY
Citation273 N.W. 188,65 S.D. 272
Decision Date15 May 1937
Docket NumberNo. 8045.
PartiesSTATE v. FAIRBANKS.

65 S.D. 272
273 N.W. 188

STATE
v.
FAIRBANKS.

No. 8045.

Supreme Court of South Dakota.

May 15, 1937.


Appeal from Municipal Court of Watertown, Codington County; Lloyd B. Peterson, Judge.

Wm. C. Fairbanks was convicted for operating a music vending slot machine without having paid the statutory license fee, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

Tom Kirby and L. E. Waggoner, both of Sioux Falls, for appellant.

Clair Roddewig, Atty. Gen., and Herman L. Bode, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.


POLLEY, Judge.

Appellant was prosecuted and convicted for operating a certain music vending slot machine without having paid the statutory license fee thereon, in violation of the provisions of section 1, chapter 206, Laws 1935. Said section reads as follows: “Any person, firm, corporation or association who shall use, install or display for public use, any gum machine, mint vending machine, candy vending machine, marble board, striking machine, electric shock machine, match machine, sanitary or hygienic appliance dispensers or any other machine requiring the deposit of money or metal chips therein before operating, other than sanitary napkin machines, pay telephones, gas meters, electric light meters, water meters, pay toilets, public weighing scales, postage stamp machines, and drinking cup machines, within the State of South Dakota, shall before doing so, secure a license for said machine from the Secretary of Agriculture of the State of South Dakota and pay the license fee provided herein.”

The machine used by appellant, as described in the evidence, is a “player phonograph machine” containing twelve records and is operated by placing a nickle in the machine and moving a dial to the record the operator wishes to play. The machine will then play one of the twelve records.

[273 N.W. 189]

A machine such as above described is not specially listed in the statute, therefore if included in the said statute at all must come within the clause, “or any other machine requiring the deposit of money or metal chips therein before operating.”

[1][2] In this case, as stated by appellant in his brief, the question is, “Do phonograph player machines as described in the evidence, and which dispense music for money, come within the terms of chapter 206, Session Laws of 1935, so as to require a license as provided in said law?” We think they do. It will be noted that the statute especially enumerates certain vending machines. Then follows the clause, “or any other machine requiring the deposit of money or metal chips therein before operating”; these machines are all subject to the payment of a license fee. Then follows an enumeration of other vending machines which are especially enumerated as exempt from the payment of license fees.

It is clear to us from the wording of this statute that it was the intent of the Legislature to deal with the whole subject of slot vending machines. The machines affected by the statute are all slot vending machines that are operated by dropping a coin or metal chip into the slot. Some of them vend gum, some of them vend candy, some of them vend matches, and still others of them vend music. While some of them vend one thing and some another, they are all vending machines and they are all slot machines.

It is the contention of appellant that the rule “ejusdem generis”...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • Kelley v. Duling Enterprises, Inc., No. 10561
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of South Dakota
    • 8 Diciembre 1969
    ...meaning of the words with which it is associated. The rule of ejusdem generis applies to the construction of statutes. State v. Fairbanks, 65 S.D. 272, 273 N.W. 188, 111 A.L.R. 759; State ex rel. Gammons v. Sorlie, 56 N.D. 650, 219 N.W. As used in this criminal statute the terms 'advertisin......
  • Grievance of O'Neill, No. 14347
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of South Dakota
    • 2 Mayo 1984
    ...of the same general kind as those enumerated. Kelley v. Duling Enterprises, Inc., 84 S.D. 427, 172 N.W.2d 727 (1969); State v. Fairbanks, 65 S.D. 272, 273 N.W. 188 (1937), 111 A.L.R. 759; See also Aberdeen Ed. Ass'n v. Aberdeen Bd. of Ed., 88 S.D. 127, 215 N.W.2d 837 (1974) (Wollman, J., co......
2 cases
  • Kelley v. Duling Enterprises, Inc., No. 10561
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of South Dakota
    • 8 Diciembre 1969
    ...meaning of the words with which it is associated. The rule of ejusdem generis applies to the construction of statutes. State v. Fairbanks, 65 S.D. 272, 273 N.W. 188, 111 A.L.R. 759; State ex rel. Gammons v. Sorlie, 56 N.D. 650, 219 N.W. As used in this criminal statute the terms 'advertisin......
  • Grievance of O'Neill, No. 14347
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of South Dakota
    • 2 Mayo 1984
    ...of the same general kind as those enumerated. Kelley v. Duling Enterprises, Inc., 84 S.D. 427, 172 N.W.2d 727 (1969); State v. Fairbanks, 65 S.D. 272, 273 N.W. 188 (1937), 111 A.L.R. 759; See also Aberdeen Ed. Ass'n v. Aberdeen Bd. of Ed., 88 S.D. 127, 215 N.W.2d 837 (1974) (Wollman, J., co......

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