Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1915-01-09


casioned thereby.
8. Although a legal remedy may be
adequate for any single act of tres
pass or any single wrong, yet when
such actsS or wrongs are continuous
in their nature and the entire wrong
may be prevented by Injunction, that
form of %proceedig is preferable to
one at law, because full compensation
for the entire wrong cannot be OBJ
tanned in one action at law.
9. I~rreparable injury, in the sense
that it furnishes a ground for the is
suance of an Injunction, does not mean
that the injury is beyond the posi-
bility of repair or compensation for
damages, but rather that it is of such
constant and frequent recurrence that
the injured party cannot be adequate
~ compensated for damages, or that
the damage resulting cannot be meas
ured by any certain pecuniary stand
ard, but only by conjecture.
TO-: When the legislature provides
for the inspection of commodities
during transit, brought from other
states into North Dakota, and fixes
the fee for such inspection materially
greater. than the cost thereof, the
measure becomes not only a police
measure, but also a revenue measure,
and to the extent that the fees ex.
coed the reasonably necessary cost
of inspection the tax is invalid, as in
conflict. with the commerce provis-
ions of the federal constitution.
II. The decisions of the supreme
court of the United States on federal
questions are absolutely controlling,
when the same questions are present
ed in state courts, and the latter have
no alternative but to follow the federal
authorities. In Foote VS.. Maryland,
1872 U. S. 494, validity of a tax provid-
ed by a police inspection law of the
state of Maryland. The facts and
principles were in all respects identi-
cal with those in the case at bar, ex-
cept that the revenue derived from
the inspection fee was less in proper
ton to the cost of inspection than
under the law which we are consid-
ering. The supreme court of the Unit
ed States held the tax OF inspection
fee invalid. This decision is c%ontroll-
ing and must be followed by the courts
CT this state.
IL. If on proof the allegations of
the complaint in the case at bar, with
reference to the excessiveness of the
fee charged for inspecting oil and
gasoline, are found correct, such fee
is a tax on property, not according
to its true value in money, and 10 the
extent that it exceeds the cost of in:
spection is a revenue measure, and
in conflict with Sec. 176 of the con-
stitution, which provides that laws
shall be passed taxing by uniform
rule all property according to its true
value in money. See Malin v. La
Moure County, 81 N. D. 40.
13. Il is held that the districtGcourt
did not abuse it's discretion in, deny
my the motion to vacate the temper.
airy Injunction, granted at the begin.
ming of this action -
(Syllabus by the Court. )%r
Appeal from orders of the district
court of, Grand Forks county; Hon.
Chas. M. Cooley, J..
Affirmed Opinion by, Spalding, c.
J. Burke, conCurs in part.
Frank B. Feetham, of Grand Forks,
N. D., attorney for plaintiff and res
pondent. 49,
Andrew Miller, attorney, general, Al
fred Zuger and John Carmody, assist
ant attorneys general, all of Bismarck,
N. D.. attorneys for defendant and ap-
pellant. .t5