The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1885-04-14

I wealth and merit are concomitant, ana
it is too questionable 10 be part OF the
law in any extensive sense. We con-
tend, however. that the amount author
lied to be eXacted under the law was not
intended tor any such purpose. Two
considerations, suggested by the act,
seem TO Us decisive, that the amount re-
quired 10 be collected was intended
wholly for revenue. First the amount Is
to be graduated to the class of business.
and Licenses. for the same classes OF
! business, uniform IN amount The
4 act is not clear in respect to this CLASH
! fication. l shall recur to this feature
! and the discretion vested in the county
boards, and common councils to fix the
J amount for another purpose, but
obviously the classification is required
fer the purpose of adjusting the amount
! 10 the prodHctivenesS of the business.
/ There can be no exclusion if the amount
1 to be paid is thus to be adjusted. 1t thus
/ tempers the exaction to the means of the
! applicant. Ii his business is TO be small.
, the amount required will be small. This
! provision implies an intention of the
[ Legislature to conform TO the funda-
4 mental axiom of taxation, that it be
equal, uniform or proportional. Such a
feature of the enactment had q control
ling effect to evince the intention To
raise revenue in Commonwealth vS.Stod-
der q Cush. 573). The range OF discre-
ton indicated by the limits fixed imply
that Il moderate sum may suffice for
certain classes, and that a large and
lucrative business is expected to con-
tribute literally.
-MGnuf dcturerS, wholesale
and retail dealers are all required to
obtain licenses, and the act Is singu-
I larly free from those specifications and
| details relative to retailers to be found
in acts generally which are passed for
/ police purposes, and which so plainly
manifest the lawmakers distrust and
reluctant liberation. This act requires
all licensees to give a honda bond con-
| tanning the same conditionS-requires
all of them to observe the same regula-
tons. Sections five, six and seven apply
| to all licensees-and only to them. This
| statute does not intend to stop the busl-
ness; it contemplates its continuance
under license; separate licenses are
| issuable to manufacture and
do wholesale business. Such
business requires no more
regulation for police purposes than
wagon-making or general merchandlZ-
ing. There is no distinction made in
the act between the manufacturers OF
malt or vinous and spirituous liquors
except in favor of the vine grower.
The act as to them is manifestly a
revenue act 1t is such because they
produce merely a commodity; they do
| not come in contact with the consumer.
Being such, lie a revenue act,
inherently and necessarily as to
wholesale dealers, it is as to
the retail class, for the latter is in no
way distinguished in the act from the
other class for purposes of police regula-
ton.
The act applies to all manufacturers
and vendors ''of any spirituous, vinous.
malt or other intoxicating liquors. p"
The same penalty is prescribed for
wholesale and retail transactions with
out license. There is no description
of wholesale dealer nor of a retailer,
obviously for the reason that the law
makes no distinction between them
they are both required to pay revenue
and they are licensed as wholesale or
retail dealers for the purpose of
graduating the exaction to the
importance of the trade carried
on by each. No license IS con-
templated to a manufacturer merely.
The unlicensed manufacturer is pro-
hibited BY the first section, but is not
is that every license, whether for a
wholesale or retail business, gives per-
mission to manufacture. Section re-
quires the license to state: 1.-The name
of the person licensed, the place of bust
ness, the kind or kinds of liquors to be
manufactured, sold, bartered or other
wise disposed of, the date of commence
ment and expiration of such license,
whether it is for a retail or wholesale
business, that the person named therein
is duly authorized to carry on the bust
ness of manufacturing. selling, barterlng
or otherwise disposing of intoxicating
liquors at the place and for the time
therein specified, and that the license
is not transferable.
We insist that the power to regulate
BY high license exaction, requiring more
to be paid than will suffice for making
out the license papers and exercising
any supervision Contemplated, must in
clude a power to tax; and, therefore,
such an act is both a revenue law and a
police measure.
MAYS VS.. Cincinnati, Ohio ST., 273.
Commonwealth VS.. Stodder, 2 Cush,
573.
Durham VS.. Rochester, Cow. 466.
Burlington VS.. Put. ms. Co., 81 Iowa,
1872.
Collins VS.. Louisville, B. Mon, 1874.
Freeholders VS.. Barber, n. ]. L., 81.
Laundry License Cases, % Fed. Rep,
7O4.
Burlington VS.. Bamgardner, ~ Iowa,
Flanagan VS.. PlainfeId, 44N.J. L.,
118.
North II. &c Ry. VS.. Hoboken, Il id.
Cooley on Tax, 400 and note.
Cooley on Const. Lin, 245-246.
! If ia granted power to regulate does
not include the power to levy and col
lect license fees beyond the cost OF the
license and the supervision Of the bust
ness licensed, in order to subserve the
public interest in a police sense, then
certainly when theLegislature possessing
both the police and taxing powers in
their fitness enact such a law, it will be
intended necessarily that 1t has done SO
in the exercise of both powers. The
revenue feature must conform to the
principles which are vital to the validity
of ali taxation; and the provisions
which are referable to the police power
are to be tested by the principles which
eynvaru nolice fppisl2 fiOn