Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1900-09-06
COURT DECISIONS.
iDlGESTED BY W. 3. MARTIN
EXCLUSIVELY FOR
viRcINIAN-PILoT.
Notes of Cases Recently Decided
Which Are Of interest to
Our People.
STATE ". MORRISON.

STATE ". MORRISON.
Supreme Court OF North Carolina.
June 8, 1900.
THE LAW OF NORTH CAROLINA
TAKING PERSONS SELLING
PIANOS AND ORGANS REQUIRES
A SEPARATE LICENSE FOR
EACH AGENT ENGAGED IN
SELLING.
The court says:
The defendant is indicted for engag-
Ing in the business of selling pianos
and organs in Lincoln county without
license. 1t Is found by the special YER
dict that r. M. Andrews & Co., a cor
poration having Its principal place OF
business In Mecklenburg. upon pay
ment OF $40 obtained license from the
sheriff Of that county under the above
section; that it had several agents and
employees travelling and selling or
gans by sample under that one license;
that the defendant sold organs in Lin
coin as one of the agents of afore-
SAID corporation; that no license
had been issued to him. 1t is
NOT FOUND. nor indeed, is 1t contended,
that the defendant had in possession
tne license Issued to said corporation.
II he had, that was a matter of de-
Iense, to be shown in evidence, and
found as a fact. The sole question
arising upon the special verdict Is
whether such license protects only the
person or agent who has 1t in his pos
session, or an unlimited number of
agents. Among the rules for the con-
struction OF an act. IL of doubtful
meaning is that the intent must gov
ern' II II can be nscertained. and a rea-
sonabie construction must be placed
upon the statute; taking 1t in connec-
ton with the other provisions with
which 1t Is associated, and the previous
law.
must be signed by the sheriff and
counterslgned by the register of deeds.
and the fact that when thus authen-
ticated the licehsee shall be able to
sell anywhere In the 81 counties of the
State. would indicate that the license
snail protect only the agent who at the
time has 1t In possession. II this were
not So why require signing and coun-
tersigning. and why the absence of pro-
visions for certifying duplicates or
copies? Shall the sherffs OF each OF
the other counties be held off by the
simple statement of any one selling
pianos and organs that he Is agent for
a corporation which has paid $40 to
some sheriff, In perhaps n distant coun-
ty, and gotten his license? If the
license Is good without producing it,
then every sheriff must take the word
OF any salesman who says that his
principal has gotten his license in some
other county. or run the risk of an ac-
ton for false Imprisonment or Illegal
arrest. Is that Il reasonable construc-
tion of the law?
2. Construed by the context, section
26 (the section just before thls) re-
quires license for selling sewing ma
chimes Tin which there is possibly less
profit, because more competition to
be issued by the State Treasurer. For
that the sum of $3.50 is required, and
there Is accordingly n provision that
the licensee shall have power to en-
ploy an unlimited number of agents to
SELF under his license, and that the
treasurer shall issue duplicate licenses
upon payment of so cents each. The
absence of these two provisions in sec
ton q. and the eXaction of only $40
instead of $3.50, is convincing proof
that the Legislative intent was that the
latter license should authorize no agent
to sell. other than the one having it in
possession. There is nothing to indl-
cate that the legislature meant to dis
criminate against useful sewing ma
chimes and In favor OF ornamental
pianos. by taxing the business OF SELL
ing the former $3.50. and the latter only
So. This would not be reasonable
construction of the statute.
3. The former laws claws of 1895 c.
1l6, section 25) required tax of $3.50 for
license to sell pianos and organs. The
reduction to $40 was made by the act
of 1887. c. 16S. section &c; and, though
the public treasurer was to issue the
license, there was a significant absence
of authority to--liconso- employ an
unlimited number OF agents. and for
issue to him of certified copies of the
license. which then, as now. appears in
the section (23) just before it. and
which eXacts a license tax of $3.50 for
the kindred and hardly more profitable
business of selling sewing machines
These two sections as to licenses for
selling sewing machines and for selling
pianos and organs are re-enacted in
1899, with the difference only that in
the latter section the license Is to be
issued by the sheriff instead of the
State Treasurer.
For these reasons, we must think
that the legislative intent was that the
$40 license authorizes only the person
having it in possession to sell under It.
Such has always been the policy of the
law, except when the statute author
ICED the issuance of certified duplicates
OF copies of the license.