Darling v. City of St. Paul
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Certiorari to the city justice of the city of St. Paul, before whom the plaintiff in error had been convicted of &• violation of an ordinance of the city, and had been sentenced to pay a fine of twenty-four dollars. The ordinance is set forth at length in the opinion, with so much of the charter of the city as is necessary for a full understanding of the case.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
McMillan, J.
In the view we take of this case, it will be necessary to consider only whether the ordi*391nance in question is in accordance with the power granted by the city charter. We will therefore assume, for the purposes of this case, that the legislature has -authority to license and regulate the occupation or employment of selling, by sample, goods, wares and merchandize, and to require the payment o.f a sum of money for such license, and may likewise confer such powers upon municipal corporations.
By express provision of the charter of the city of St. Paul, it is enacted that…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Fretwell v. City of TroySupreme Court of Kansas · 1877
- Devereaux v. Township BoardMichigan Supreme Court · 1920
- Stevens v. Minneapolis Fire Department Relief Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1945
- State v. GlavinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1895
- Jovaag v. O'DonnellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1933
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.