The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1908-12-26
SUPREME COURT OPINIONS
ON SAL DON ORDINANCE


censee being required to pa he same
amount in the 2arter. case, the county
not being required 20 snare with the
municipality.
The power TO regulate OF. restrain
short of absolute prohibition, Ex
Parte Thsisen; 80 Fla 529, IL South
Rep. 9oI, is not an abs olcte. arbi-
trary power. but must be Exercised in
reasonable manner. We indulge
1 prescriptions in favor of the reason.
abieness of an ordinance, out OF def
erence to the superior opportunities
for knowledge of the actual existing
conditions in municipalities possessed
by the city council over u.s., and We are
fully alive TO the powerful al gtinlents
t1at, may be advanced in favor; of re-
| stricting saloons within limits easily
! policed, but we are bound. SO the fixed
rules of law requiring close SCRUTINY
OF statutes comforting, authority to
impose taxes. and the suspicion al
ways aroused by discrininations az
| parently excessive
There may, it is true. be other com
siderations than those negatiyea in
the alternative writ. which would sup
! port a substantial discrimination,
when diseri ninstion is authorized:
but the most important are those aris-
ing from the costs of the regulation
and the character of the buildings
within the two sections. as being de-
voted to business or residence p,lr-
poses.
we decide nothing now. however,
but that the showing here made over
came tie prima facies OF reasonable
ness or the ordinance, and that the
burden was shifted to, and unnlet by
the respondent.
| The judgment is affirmed.
| Shackleford. c. H., and whitfield. J :.
concur; Taylor, j., concurs in the
| opinion.
Whitfield. J., concurrins:
concur IN the opinion Of Mr.. JUS
tice Cockrell. The ordinance must
rest on either the police power or the
| taxing power conferred upon the mti-.
nicipadty
The powers of the city With refer
ence to this controversy ars con-
tanned in the provisions of the general
law and special acts authorizing the
city to impose license and occupa-
tional taxes upon all trades, profess
sioHs and businesses conducted with
IN the city limits TO regulate and
restrain ell tipping, barrooIns and all
places where beer, wines or spirituou.
iqnors Of any kind is sold at retail.
or to be drank upon tae premises
Were sold. to require all
such places to be kept and Used SUBJ
Ject to such reasonable regulations as
the council may prescribe: TO REQUIRE
all keepers of such places I'd procure
from the city or town license for
Keeping the same. under such pains.
penalties and forfeitureS as the coun-
Gil may prescribe:" and TO pass for
the government of the city any orli-
nance not IN conflict with the consfi-
tuition of the United States, the con-
stitution of Florida, and statutes
thereof
The power ito regulate and re-
strain" and Ito require all keepers OF
such places to procure from the city
or town a license for keering she
same is a police power. The charge
for such license as police regulation.
IS confined 10 the. expense of issuing
the license and the cost of police in
spection and supervision of the BUSH
ness so licensed. In addition to re-
curing "a license to be procured as a |
police regulation. the city is expressly
authorized ito regulate and restrain
barrooms" by the direct and |
reasonable exercise of the police DOW |
er given to the city as above quoted. |
lawfully accentuated.
The power to "impose license and |
cecupational taxes" is taxing power /!
and is to be exercised within the |
terms OF the grant and subject to the |
constitutional provisions for the pro-
lection of property rights. No au- !
tlority is expressly given III discrini- /
mate IN the amount of license tax i'm /
posed upon those engaged in the same /
business conducted within the city
limits. Proper claSsificaliOns may
no n r<ar-
license tax, in excess of the cost of |
issuing the license and the inspection !
and supervision of the business IL /
but such sclassifications should |
not be SO unjustly discriminatory as TO
be unreasonable and 20 deprive any
person OF property without due pro-
ces of Law and to deny to any person I
the equal protection cfst1e laws in yio-
lation of constitutional provisions.
7 Where the taxing power may be +
used for purposes OF restraint there +
should be no unjust restrain or sun-
bleness in the exer,ise of the
power
In this case the difference OF l5Dl
per cent in the license tax imposed /
by the ordinance upon those engaged /
IN. the same business cannot under the
In the plea dings be said to
have been made for the purpose of !.
meeting the cost OF issuing the license
and of police inspection and super
vision of the business, under the pow
ct given to regulate and restrain: -
therefore it must be imposed as Ill E
cense tax" as it purports IN it's face
TO BE. As license tax il is in
amount clearly discrinnnation. and
while there may be basis for class
fication justifyfng such discrimina-i
ton in the amount of TIE license tax
yet the amount OF the difference in
the license tax taken with the adj
missions Of the pleadings appears to /,
be sufficient to overcome he prima
iacies. of reasonableness ordinarily in T,
1ulged in favor of an ordinance, and +,
% require some response from the
eity in support of the discriminating
license tax i
A Dissenting Opinion. II
Parkhin, j.. dissenting, aud Hooker, 1
J.. concurs- Il
The city council of Pensacola is (,
given power to pass. for the govern (.