The Princeton union. [volume] (Princeton, Minn.) 1876-1976, 1894-02-01
SCALPERS ARE on. TOP
r1TEs ANTI-BROIxERL LAW IS de-
CLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL

Judge willis, Of the Ramsey County
Famous LAW Of the Inst Lesis-'
lnture La Void. -.
st. Paul. Jan. 3O.--One of the most |
important decisions made in the Ramsey |
county district court was that read by |
Judge Willis in open court in the case
of the state against G: Z. Corbett, in
dicted under the ticket scalping law"
so called, passed by the last legislature.
In that case n demurrer to the indict-
ment was interposed by Hitler H. Horton,
who argued the case with great ability
assisted by his partner, MIR. Denegre,
while the county attorney, Mr.. Butler,
assisted by Mr.. Charles Bum, appeared
70: the state Judge Willis sustained the
demurrer and will certify the question
to the supreme court for a final decision.
The law was attacked on the ground
of it's constitutionality. After referring
! to the provisions of the law, Judge
| Willis says, in his memorandum:
1.-The act contains no provision re-
| quiring the issuance of license to sell
! these tickets to any citizen of good char
acter who may apply for such license and
pay the fee therefor. 1t provides no quail
/
| on the part of an applicant for q license.
! All that is required of an applicant is
| that he shall be presented to the icens-
in5 authority under the potent patronage
| of a person OF corporation fortunate
enough to be the owner of u railway or
a steamship 1t is made, by this statute,
the duty Of the owners of any railway or
steamship to redeem tickets for the trans
pCrtation of passengers once issued by
such owners, in cases where the original
vendor is the owner Of q railroad or
steamboat situate Or operated, in whole
or in part, within this state No pro-
vision is made for the redemption Of
tickets of the kind mentioned sold by
persons other than the owners of every
railroad or steamboat situate or operated
in whole or in part within this state.
'"There is no provision in the act for
the redemption of the ticket described
in the Indictment in the case at bar, if
such ticket were originally purchased in
the State of Wisconsin from the agent OF
a railway company chartered under the
laws of that state and owning and con,
trolling no lines outside of Wisconsin
Suppose the ticket mentioned in the In,
dictment was sold to the defendant a!
Milwaukee, Wis. Unless he bought il
from an agent of the Northern Pacific
Railroad company he can neither sell II
| nor force it's redemption under the laws
. of this state if the statute under con
s;deration be allowed full force. His
property in this ticket is thus annihi1atet
so far as it's exchangeable value is con
Cerned. The ticket is marked mot trans
ferable.' But the condition simply mean
that the issuer of the ticket will no
recognize it as sufficient evidence in tn
e hands of any assignee Of the origina
l holder to entitle such assignee to trans
Z portation by virtue thereof. 1t does no
i extinguish it's existence as an article o
commerce. That result is accomplished
however, if the statute under review
constitutional.
q '"rhe statute, by forbidding the sal
= of railway and steamship tickets, recos
|, nizes such tickets as chattel propert!
l. and as articles which have been til
IS subject of commercial transactions
il barter and sale. In assuming to destro
e the value of such chattels as articles {
a commerce, the statute must be justified
~ | if at ALL as an exercise of the police pov
IL or. That power has never been allowe
Of | to ACHIEVE the destruction of priva
or property, unless it's exercise was d
er retted towards the preservation Of if
,e health or morals. The various statut
~ of Iowa and Kansas, prohibiting the ma
Sc ufa cture of into 4icating beverages, ha'
or been upheld on that ground as cons
tutional measures for the exercise
the police power.
''Ttis statute does not declare t
w. selling of transportation tickets to be
es business dangerous to health CT mora
of Nor could such a decision be sustaine
,st Tie sale of such chattels is per Sc in1
las cent. The legislation under which t
A pending proposition is based aims at
-, complete prohibition of such sales a
~ the suppression Of traffic in transport
a, ton tickets except by a privileged ella
eu the persons designated by the owners
lo' railways and steamships and Ecens
tx by the state government pursuant
Ter such designation. This favoritism is
his pugnant to the entire scope and spi
Of our state constitution. The provisi
for the issuance of license restrict
the issuance to persons designated by I
es, owners of any railroad or steamboat
red an unconstitutional delegation of the
Ho | censing power.
tbo "While the statute under cOnsiderat
6. is a conspicuous example of class les
lation, it could not be successfully
w., peached upon that ground, if it's ena
lie ment by the legislative authority of
>eu sts to were not in direct conflict with Il
III prior and supreme expression of the s
the creign will Of free people which is
bodied in the ste te constitution.
''That instrument declares that mo +
son d shall be
{. pri, ed of life, liberty Or property with
20 due process of law
her ''The statute, which is now under
md view, violates that constitutional pro
her len.
ND '"This statute, by creating spa
her class Of citizens to whom alone licen
ind may be issued, violates section 81
+o. al ticle Of the state constitution VII
declares the legislature shall pass
law granting to any corporation or il
v:dual any special or exclusive privile
'It may be that some sections of
rop- statute are not justly open to the
lalo lection that they are unconstitutional.
III it is evident that the entire ascOpe of