Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1921-08-19
MOTOR VEHICLE
ACT HELD VALID
BY JUDGE MOLL
Court DissOlves Temporary Re-
straining Order Given Viii
liam S. Frye in Suit.
LAW NOT DISCRIMINATORY

With a reservation. that the court was
not satisfied that the rates named In
section 8 Of the 1921 amendment to the
1913 act for registering and hcensiE g
motor vehicles and trailers were so
grossly exorbitant as 10 render the act
void" Judge T. J. Mol of superior Court,
Room 3 today held constitutional the
1913 motor vehicle act with its 1919 and
1871 amendments.
This ruling was made in the case OF
William S Frye, q local transfer man,
who fled action asking that Ed Jack
son. secretary Of state, William Z. Evans.
prosecuting attorney for Marion County,
Jerry Kinney. chief OF police and other
officials be restrained from enforcing the
act.
Judge Moll, in his ruling. dissolved a
Temporary restraining order which he
had previously issued and refused 20
grant to Frye a temporary injunction
RI LING COVERS
SEVERAL POINTS.
The high points Of Judge AIoI's sweep
ing decision regarding the validity Of
the motor vehicle registering and licens-
ing act are as af0IOws;
That the title Of the act Is broad
enough to embrace all OF the subject
matter contained IN the act proper
and in the amendments Of 1919 and
1921.
That the act is not discriminatory
That the act is not arbitrary and
unfair IS to classihCatlons Of We
hlcles.
That the act IS not double taxa
ton, but is a privilege tax under
the police power and not 4 property
tax under the tax powers.
That the trailer law, as passed by
the 1921 General Assembly, is com
plete and valid.
That the act is constitutional and
Is not contrary TO the provisions
Of the United States aud the State Of
Indiana.
In ruling against Frye's contention that
the title OF the act IS not legally broad
enough to include the subject matter Of
the amendments RELATIVE to licensing and
taxing for revenue. J d ss Mol held as
follows:
"a reading Of the titles to the act Of
1913 and the amendatory acts OF 1919
and 1921 discloses that the general sub
iect Of the series Of legislation is motor
vehicles. It is equally clear that the
matters connected Herewith as ex-
pressed IN the constitution, are the regis
motor vehicles, the defining. examining
and licensing Of chauffeurs and the pre-
scribing Of penalties for violators. In
the case at bar there can be. in fact is.
no serious controversy that the praintlf
is within the act and its amendments so
far as the general subject (mOtor vehicle5)
is concerned"
The court. in its opinion. cited many
cases which have come before the Su-
preme Court Of Indiana relative to titles
and then stated that we conclude that
section 6. as included In the 1921 amend
ment. is within the REORGANIZATION Of
the title of the original act OF 1913, as
included IN the word regulate
In discussing other points Of the con
troveTsy, Judge Mol stated that the
act Of 1913 as amended in section 6 in
1921 is attacked as being discrimlna-
tory. and hence void. While there is a
multitude Of cases, State and Federal.
passing on the validity of statutes and
ordinances, questioned as being discrim-
inatory. no fixed general rule can be
deducted. Most OF such laws that have
Continued on Page Thirteen.)