Vilas County news. [volume] (Eagle River, Vilas County, Wis.) 1896-1927, 1903-10-05
AGENTS NEED NOT
PAY LICENSES
May TAKE ORDERS BUT CAN
NOT PEDDLE.
TRANSIENT CASE DECIDED
Supreme Court Rules That travelling
Representative Who Does Not
Bring With Him a Stock of Goods
Is Not a Temporary Merchant in
the Contemplation OF me Law.
Madison, Sept. so.

Madison, Sept. so.
Agents soliciting orders by sample
do not come under the transient
merchant ordinances OF cities and
villages, according to a decision
handed down by the supreme court
yesterday morning. Unless the agent
carries with him a stock OF goods
which he brings into the locality
from elsewhere, barriers his goods.
in that locality, delivering at the
tine he takes the orders, he cannot
be taxed as a transient merchant OF
I peddler.
The Const.tutiOnality of the ped
dlers' license statute was brought
up in the argument of the case but
was not decided by the supreme
court, the point being left to some
case depending upon that point alone.
w. II. Heidman, agent for the
A. Chapman Co, of Milwaukee, can
vassed the city OF Wausau for five
days, taking orders by sample, to be
delivered out of the stock OF the COM
Iany in Milwaukee. The city Ordi-
nance, leyying a license Zee of SIS u
day upon all transient merchants 0r
traders, was invoked against the
agent and he was arrested. The cir
cult court trial resulted in a victory
for the city and the agent Heidman
appealed, setting forth the ground
that he did not come within the O. -
nance as framed and that the statute
under which the ordinance was el-
acted was unconstitutional for tie
reason that it was in violation to the
provision of the constitution Lnat tax
es should be levied uniformly.
The supreme court reverses the
judgment of the lower court and
sends the case back with directions
to render judgment in favor of the
agent The supreme court finds am
pie protection for the agent in the
fact that he carried no stock Of
goods into the city Of Wausau, had
no interest in the business Othe- than
employee and acted merely as a trav-
cling salesman of the Chapman com
Iany.
1T is not claimed in the complaint,
which was written by Justice Ma
shall, established by evidence o.
found by the court says the opin-
ion, that the appellant brought into
the city any other goods than the
samples he carried about with him as
a mere travelling agent, or that he o.
feTed for sale or sold any of such
samples or any goods by sample cr
otherwise. That essential of the or
dinance was left wholly uncovered.
In that situation il seems that th9
case of the city clearly failed to SAT
isfy the calls of the ordinance. Be
ing a penal law, upon familiar prin
ciples il must be strictly construed
against the city if open to cOnstruc-
ton at all. The learned trial court
obviously supposed it was so open,
for certainly the mere taking OF Or
ders for goods at Wausau, to be fill
ed out OF a mercantile stock in Nil
waukee, exhibiting samples in so do
ing, is not within the literal senSs
of the words, bring into the city OF
Wausau any article or articles or
trade" &C, and sell or expose for
sale, barter or exchange, by sample
or otherwise any such goods. Such
literal sense plainly covers only sell
ing OF goods by sample or otherwise
out CT a stock of goods brought into
the city by the seller and presently
therein. To read into the words.
used the idea that they were aimed
at mere travelling men, or agents,
taking orders for goods as appellant
did, would require not only construc-
ton, but construction of a violent
character,-One hardly warranted IN
any case; certainly not IN one IN
volving the rights of person charg-
ed under a penal statute