The Saint Paul globe., 1900-01-19

Decision Heads Off DR.. Ohage's Move
for CoerciOn-List of Dafrymen
j. whose Cows Have Passed the
whose Names the Women's Civic
League Caused to Be Published.
The supreme court yesterday handed
| down a decision in the case OF the city
against Frederick r. Peck, the sult
brought to test the validity Of the city
ordinance requiring the payment OF rec
| Of 80 cents by nlilkmen for every COW In
| spected by the health department. The
| decision is written by Associate Justice
Brown and holds the ordinance unconsti-
| tutional as 1t has to do with the 1mposi-
| ton of a fee for the service.
The general trend Of the opinion is to
the effect that the conservation Of the
public health is Of paramount considera-
| ton to that of a mere matter Of revenue.
Furthermore it recognizes the dairy in
dustry as most important and beneficial
business, and as O matter Of good law 1t
would not be judicious to cripple 1t. The
case is, however,. decided strictly on
points of law. The law which authorizes
the city to require an inspection says that
no fee shall be charged. and furthermore,
the st. Paul ordinance conflicts with the
state law which only charges 81 for a
milkman's license. The lower court is re-
versed. The opinion Is as follows:
TEXT OF THE DECISION.
City Of ST. Paul, respondent. VS.. Frederick
Chapter 203 General Laws Of 1895.
authorizes the city council of any city
to provide by. ordinance for the in
spection of milk of dairies and of dairy
herds kept for the production of milk
| within its limits, and to issue licenses for
the sale of such milk therein. Under this
authority the city council of St. Paul
providing for such inspection and impos-
| ing an inspection fee of 30 cents for each
animal inspected, to be paid by the owner
Of the animal at the time Of inspection.
| The defendant owns a dairy herd and is
| engaged in the business Of selling milk
within the city Of st. Paul. He duly ap-
piled for license under the provisions Of
| this ordinance, but his application was
denied by the city authorities fer the rea-
son that he refused to pay the inspection
| fee. He continued his business without a
license and was arrested and convicted
for a violation of the ordinance He ap-
peals from the Judgment of conviction.
Although there are ten assignments Of
error, under some Of which some minor
|
the case upon the main and important
| question whether the ordinance referred
to, or rather that portion imposing the
inspection fee Is q valid law. In its main
| features the ordinance Is substantially
similar to that involved in the State VS..
Nelson, Sc Mimi, 166. The only diff
ference between the two ordinances is
the one. involwedsin that case, while one
IS provideds@forsaby the ordinance here
under consideration; AS isWe oeonclude
imposing such zee, itIiwilF not be neces-
sary to consider any other question In the
case 80 r ~
The business of dairying and of keep
| production of milk for sale to the in
| habitants Of cities has come to be a
business Of very large proportions in this
state. Large quantities Of such milk are
| daily sold to- and consumed by such In
| habitants and it Is relied upon and used
| as one of the principal articles of food.
1t Is important that such milk be
WHOLESOME AND PURE,
and considerations for the health of the
citizen demand and require the passage
/ and enactment of such police regulations
! as will prevent the maintenance Of dis
! eased animals from which such milk Is
obtained, and the selling or disposing. Of
1 impure and unwholesome milk There
can be no question as to the validity Of
such laws they are everywhere upheld.
| And the right of the legislature to confer
| upon CICl6S the T1SnC ana authority to
enact them is also upheld State vs..
Nelson supra. Such laws are not en-
acted by the state nor authorized to be
| enacted by cities or other municipalities,
but solely as police regulations. and in
the interest Of the public welfare In
cases where the authority is conferred
upon cities. and such authority is silent
| thorities all hold that the right to i'm
pose, as incident to the exercise of the
power, such reasonable fees7a as are neces-
| sa1y to defraY Cthe legitimate expenses of
| administrations implied But fees and
charges, whether dominated license fees
| or inspection fees, which go beyond this
| and tend to destroyer materially injure
the industry are not sustained And in
| this case, if the authority under which
the city acted in passing the ordinance
in question was silent on the subject we
| tiles generally, have only to determine
| the question whether the fee imposed
by the ordinance is within reasonable
limits. But the ordinance is not silent,
| and we have for determination the proper
construction Of the statute under which
! it was enacted. What authority did the
| legislature intend to confer upon cities
by chap. 2O9, G. S. 1895? The statute reads
Section /. The city council of any city
may by ordinance provide. for the in
dairy herds kept for the production Of
| milk within It's limits and issue licenses,
| for which
NO FEE SHALL BE CHARGED,
| for the sale of milk within it's limits and
| regulate the same, and may authorize
| and empower the board Of health to en-
| force all laws and ordinances relating to
| the production and sale Of milk and the
| inspection of dairies and dairy herds pro-
ducing milk, for sale or consumption
| within such city, and to appoint such
| inspectors, experts and chemists as are
| necessary for the proper enforcement of
| such laws and ordinances, their compen-
sation to be fixed by the city council, and
| such inspectors, experts and chemists
| shall be possessed Of such necessary pow
ers within the limits Of such city as shall
| be prescribed by ordinance, but no such
ordinance shall conflict with any law Of
| this state.
To what do. the words, "for which no
fee shall be charged refer; to all that
| precedes them or to the issuance of the
| license only2 The question Is by no means
| clear. Matter of punctuation is not an
| important item for consideration in the
| construction or Interpretation Of a stat
ute. The intent of the legislature must be
| sought for, and such intent must control
| without regard to the particular language
| used Of the punctuation marks employed
! When we have in mind the fact that
| a state dairy commissioner and numerous
assistants, and confer upon that official
and his aids powers similar to those con-
ferred by this ordinance; the further fact
that the state expressly licenses all milk
dealers and exacts from them the very
nominal fee Of one dollar per year; when
we have in mind that it should be the