Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1880-12-12
THE HACK ORDINANCE.
Its Validity Contested in the Faulkner Gas,
Before Judge Brill Yesterday.

Its Validity Contested in the Faulkner Case
Before Judge Brill Yesterday.
a matter which is calculated to test the
validity of the hack ordinance came before
Judge Brill yesterday morning, being the
case of the recalcitrant hickman, Frank
Faulkner, who was arrested at the st. Paul
& Manitoba railroad depot last Monday for
violating the city hack ordinance.
The defendant procured continuance and
gave bail for his appearance, and meantime
the case was taken in charge by Mr. S. L..
Pierce, who applied to the district court for
the discharge of Faulkner On a writ of ha-
beas corpus. The hearing On the applica-
ton came up at II o'clock yesterday morn
ing, Mr.. Pierce appearing for defendant,
and city attorney Murray for.the city. 1t
will be remembered that the prisoner was
arrested for going beyond the line designat-
ed for hackman at the depot, the ordinance
requiring that no driver shall go beyond
three feet from his vehicle.
The case was opened by MIR. Pierce, who
stated that the prisoner had been arrested
under ordinance $50; the points of the case
were that the complaint did not allege any
offerse, and that the charter did not author
ize such an ordinance. Counsel read the
statute regulating the conduct of hackmen
at the DEPICTS, which provides that no hack
man shall be allowed 10 stand more than
three feet from MS vehicle In soliciting GUS
toners. Reference was made to the charter
in which the words ''for hire" had been
omitted, which counsel thought was great
discrepancy. The ordinance, he said, did
net relate to the drivers of hacks, omnibuses
nj To v,arcny,c
awaiting employment at the depots. The
ordinance read, awaiting business at rail.
road depot in the city; counsel wanted to
know what depot In which city. 1t should
not be implied but must be expressed.
The power to regulate business at the
depot was not given to the city council; they
could not regulate the business of a rail
road company; that right belonged to thu
railroad companies; the council only ha6
the right to make certain police regulations
the ordinance under consideration attempted
to limit the business rights OF the people
il directed that no driver could go to the depo
without taking his hack in with him. Tht
ordinance was equivalent to an absolute
prohibition; the ordinance made it crimi
nal act If these men went into the depot t.
get warm; it wasn't q question of waitin
for business, but one that forbids then
from going to place over which the city ha
no control. Counsel read number O
authorities on the construction Of charters
the validity of ordinances; the powers O
corporations; statutes and their limitations
as bearing On the case at issue.
Counsel read the complaint, which b
characterized as not specifying any ofens.
as required by legislative enactment.
Ir. Murray replied by saying that tn
point made by counsel on the words $50
hire" having been omitted, would not hold
as the omission had been intentiona
Counsel referred to section three, pag
thirty-four, of the charter, regulating hack
men. The ordinance, he said, had bee
passed to preserve order at the depoti
Counsel cited from Dillon, sustaining h
position, and cited the enacting clause g
definitely defining the city and specific loo'
ton at which it was intended the ordinanc
should have force.
Mr.. Pierce rejoined by citing the legisls
tive enaetments which defined the limits