People v. Voorhis
Michigan Supreme Court
Exceptions before judgment from Delta; Stone, J. Clayton Yoorhis was convicted of violating the liquor law. Respondent was convicted of the offense of selling and offering for sale brewed and fermented liquors at wholesale without having paid the tax as required by sections 5379, 5380, 3 Comp.
Read the full summary
Exceptions before judgment from Delta; Stone, J. Clayton Yoorhis was convicted of violating the liquor law. Respondent was convicted of the offense of selling and offering for sale brewed and fermented liquors at wholesale without having paid the tax as required by sections 5379, 5380, 3 Comp. Laws, which read as follows: ‘ ‘ That in all townships, cities, and villages of this State there shall be paid annually the following tax upon the business of manufacturing, selling, or keeping .for sale by all persons whose business, in whole or in part, consists in selling or keeping for sale, or…
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
(after stating the facts). Counsel for respondent state their contention thus:
*401“ The requirement of the statute, when taken m connection with other provisions of the same act, prescribes a discriminating tax operating to the disadvantage of like products of other States when introduced into Michigan, and is therefore in effect a regulation in restraint of commerce among the States, ‘and as such is a usurpation of the power conferred by the Constitution upon the Congress of the United States.’ It is to be observed that, while by the provisions of section 5379 wholesalers of malt liquors are…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Lyng v. MichiganSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Reymann Brewing Co. v. BristerSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- People v. De GrootMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
3Cited by3 opinions
- Scurlock v. City of BooneSupreme Court of Iowa · 1909
- State v. San Patricio Canning Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1929
- Unitted States v. Valdez Brewing & Bottling Co.District Court, D. Alaska · 1917