State v. Hammond
| Decision Date | 14 January 1889 |
| Citation | 41 N.W. 243,40 Minn. 43 |
| Parties | STATE v HAMMOND. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
(Syllabus by the Court.)
That part of section 4 of ordinance 5 of the city of Minneapolis, which imposes a penalty upon “any person who commits any act of lewdness or indecency within the limits of said city,” is void, because it is in excess of the power vested in the city council by the city charter.
Appeal from municipal court of Minneapolis.
Albert Knittle, for appellant.
Moses E. Clapp, Atty. Gen., for the State.
The charter of the city of Minneapolis provides (section 5, c. 4) “that the city council shall have full power and authority to make, ordain, publish, enforce, alter, amend, or repeal all such ordinances for the government and good order of the city, for the suppression of vice and intemperance, and for the prevention of crime, as it shall deem expedient; *** and for these purposes the said city council shall have authority, by such ordinances, *** sixteenth, to prevent open or notorious drunkenness and obscenity in the streets or public places of said city. ***” The council passed an ordinance imposing a penalty upon any person who commits any act of lewdness or indecency within the limits of said city of Minneapolis. Section 4, ordinance 5. The precise and definite specifications of what the council may do to accomplish the general purposes mentioned in the beginning of section 5, as above quoted, (there are 42 heads of these specifications,) limit the power of the council to what is thus particularly specified; so that, if the general grant of power with which the section begins seems larger over a given subject than the subsequent specification treating of that particular subject would justify, the latter must prevail. In respect to preventing and punishing lewdness, indecency, or obscenity, the specification above quoted, and it is the only one including that subject, refers only to acts or conduct in the streets or public places of the city; only to such as may affect the public peace, decency, and good order; and does not authorize punishment for private conduct, however reprehensible it may be in the matter of morals. The ordinance exceeds the power, and is therefore void. Judgment reversed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of St. Louis v. King
... ... 89; Tiedemann, Mun. Corp., sec ... 110; Knapp v. Kansas City, 48 Mo.App. 485; ... Carpenter v. Realty Co., 103 Mo.App. 480; State ... v. Butler, 178 Mo. 272. (2) Without express authority, ... either by statute or by its charter, the city of St. Louis ... has no authority to ... State v. Taft, 118 N.C. 1193; Bregguglia ... v. Vineland, 53 N. J. L. 168; Cornwallis v ... Carlile, 10 Ore. 139; Minnesota v. Hammond, 40 ... Minn. 43; Walsh v. Union, 13 Ore. 589. (3) If an act ... tends to disturb the public peace or is injurious to the ... public health it ... ...
-
State v. Sugarman
...City of St. Paul v. Traeger, 25 Minn. 248,33 Am. Rep. 462. No former decision of this court is to the contrary, save one. State v. Hammond, 40 Minn. 43, 41 N. W. 243, is not authority for the proposition that no power to enact this ordinance can be found in the clause quoted from the first ......
-
City of Va. v. Erickson
...legislation. City of St. Paul v. Traeger, 25 Minn. 248, 252,33 Am. Rep. 462;St. Paul v. Stoltz, 33 Minn. 233, 22 N. W. 634;State v. Hammond, 40 Minn. 43, 41 N. W. 243;Green v. Eastern, &c., R. Co., 52 Minn. 79, 53 N. W. 808;Red Wing v. Chicago, &c., R. Co., 72 Minn. 240, 75 N. W. 223,71 Am.......
-
State v. Sugarman
... ... also as "incidental and necessary to the proper ... enjoyment * * * of such [powers] as are expressly ... conferred." City of St. Paul v. Traeger, 25 ... Minn. 248, 33 Am. Rep. 462. No former decision of this court ... is to the contrary, save one. State v. Hammond, 40 ... Minn. 43, 41 N.W. 243, is not authority for the proposition ... that no power to enact this ordinance can be found in the ... clause quoted from the first part of section 5, chapter 4, of ... the charter. That was a case where specific authority was ... given to prohibit certain ... ...