Ex parte Newton
California Supreme Court
Habeas Corpus. The petitioner was arrested for carrying on the business of buying and selling gold and silver coin and bullion, without procuring the “ Banker’s License ” required by sec. 3 of the Act entitled “ An Act to facilitate and equalize the collection of licenses in the City and County of San Francisco,” approved March 23rd, 1878. (Stats. 1877-8, p. 442.) He asked to be discharged from imprisonment upon the ground that the act was unconstitutional.
Read the full summary
Habeas Corpus. The petitioner was arrested for carrying on the business of buying and selling gold and silver coin and bullion, without procuring the “ Banker’s License ” required by sec. 3 of the Act entitled “ An Act to facilitate and equalize the collection of licenses in the City and County of San Francisco,” approved March 23rd, 1878. (Stats. 1877-8, p. 442.) He asked to be discharged from imprisonment upon the ground that the act was unconstitutional. The further facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court :
The Act of March 30th, 1872, to increase and facilitate the collection of licenses in San Francisco, (Stats. 1871-2, p. 736) was not abrogated or repealed by the Codes. The act, though passed at the same session as the Codes, was retained in full force and effect by the provisions of secs. 4478 and 4479 of the Political Code. The act provided, among other things, that all licenses, whether provided for by law or by the orders of the Board of Supervisors of the city and county, should be collected by the Collector of Licenses and his deputies; and also that persons transacting…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Tennison v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1901
- Ex parte MountCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885