Daily Los Angeles herald., 1881-05-18

CT " eoieCt 0uu tAo S0SASsso Va ~As
erection.
The rule Of Interpretation is thus
stated by Chancellor Kent, l
Comm, $40: ut Is an established
rule. in the exposition Of statutes,
that the intention of the law.giver
is to be deduced from view OF the
whole, and every part of the statute,
taken and compared together. The
real intention, when accurately as
certained, will always prevail over
the literal sense of terms. When
the expression in q statute Is special
or particular, but the reason is gen.
eral, the expression should be
deemed general"
Chapter Sd of the Political Code,
comforting powers on the Common
Council of municipal corporations,
Section 440S, declares that the
Common Council shall have power:
$50 provide for the licensing any
or all business not prohibited by
law, and fix the amount of license
tax for the same" Under we'll set
tied rules the charter Is to be con-
strued with reference to the general
law and the whole legislation on
the subject.
The construction of the powers.
of the Common Council on the sub.
ject of license Is scarcely an open
question. In the case of Saora-
mento vs.. Charles Crocker, 16 Cal i.
the question was presented of the
power of the corporation to exact
a license of q merchant when the
business of the merchant was not
! specially mentioned. The language
| OF the charter of that city was:
"The Supervisors shall have power
to fix aud collect license tax on
all theatres, shows, exhibitions, or
other places of amusement, and on
all trades, professions and bust.
n6ss.n
Under the argument of counsel
in this case the right to impose q
license would have been limited to
theatres, shows, exhibitions and
places of amusements; but the Su.
preme Court gave effect to the gen.
eral words, and in relation to this
election said: "It is q sufficient
answer to say that by the third
section of the Consolidation Act of
1858 (5tat. 26S) power is given to
the Board of Supervisors to levy
taxes. and cause the same to be col.
lected; and by the fourth section
(269) the Board has power to fix
and collect license tax on \
all trades, professions and business
y. There is no doubt that the
sending of merchandise is q bust.
ness within tho meaning Of the
statute" To the same effect is
Sacramento vs.. Stage Co., II Cal. (,
1874.
There is little doubt that a real
estate agency is a business within
the meaning OF the charter of the
City of Los Angeles.
The defendants counsel has re-.
ferred the Court to the case OF But
ler's Appeal, 73 Penn. ST., in
which it was decided thai: "An
Act authorized the Council of
Wilksbarre to impose a tax for po.
lice purposes on bowling alleys
and billiard tables. and also
auctioneers, or other venders of
merchandise or other articles Of
out-cry, y and all other
places of business or amuse ments
conducted for profit" did not au-
thorize tax on merchants, bank.
ers' business etc.
He has also referred the Court to
City of st. Louis vs.. Lsughlin, 49
Mo-, in which it was held: "The
Charter of the city of st. Louis.
approved March 4, 1870, provided
that the Mayor and City Council
should have power to license 'auc-
TONERS, grocers, merchants, retail
ers, hotels, " hackney
carriages, omnibuses, carts, drays
and other vehicles, and all other
business, trades and avocations or
professions whatever. The pro.
fession of 'law' was not specially
enumerated. Held that under said
provision the City Council of st.
Louis had no power to pass an Or
dinance levying on attorneys.at
law. The rule is, when general
words follow particular ones to con.
strue them as applicable only to
persons or things of the same gen.
eral character or class. And in the
case mentioned the profession OF
law was not ejusdem gsneris, and
could not be embraced III the pur.
view of the Act" The Pennsyl-
vanis case goes on the same
ground. All the cases assert that
1t Is a question of legislative inten-
tion, aud 1T cannot well be doubted
that 1t was the intention of the
Legislature of California in the
Los Angeles Charter to enlarge to
the particular by the general words
employed, 80 to authorize the tax.
alton of real estate agents, and
other business.
The Pennsylvania and Missouri
cases in their application to this
subject are in conflict with the de.
cisions of Louisiana, and especially
| OF California, which this Court is
bound to follow.
The Act of the Legislature Of
April 4, 1850, declares that, GAL
that tract of land included within
the limits of the pueblo OF Los An.
geles, as heretofore known and &C.
! knowledged, shall henceforth be
known as the city of Los Angeles,
and said city is hereby declared to
be incorporated according to the
| provisions of the Act entitled sAn
Act TO provide for the Incorporation
of cities;' approved March IS (lU,
1850" page 155. The 11th section of
1850, page SS, providing for the in.
corporation of cities, gives to the
Common Council of all cities the
power ito provide for licensing any
or all business not prohibited by
law; to fix the amount of license
tax for the same" This provision
has been retained in all subsequent
amended Los Angeles charters, al d
the power constantly exercised.
This must be regarded as settlir z
the law on the subject, both by leg
islation and usage; % Pic, Spauld-
ttNSr 4