Case Name: City of Milwaukee, Appellant, vs. Locher & Schefrin Company, Respondent
Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Wisconsin
Decision Date: 1916-10-24
Citations: 164 Wis. 167
Docket Number: 
Parties: City of Milwaukee, Appellant, vs. Locher & Schefrin Company, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Wisconsin Reports
Volume: 164
Pages: 167–172

Head Matter:
City of Milwaukee, Appellant, vs. Locher & Schefrin Company, Respondent.
October 5
October 24, 1916.
Municipal corporations: Regulation of loeights and measures: Ordinances: Violation.
1. The purpose of sec. 1428, Milwaukee Code of 1914, — -prohibiting all use of false weights and measures and providing a penalty for each violation,- — -is to require the use of weights and measures which themselves correctly express their value so that recourse need he had only to such weights and measures in order to determine the correct quantity weighed or measured.
2. The use, by a buyer of metal, of an old weight marked 100 pounds on a scale where it was the equivalent of a 200-pound weight was a violation of said sec. 1428, and proof of a single instance of such use was sufficient to warrant a conviction, even though it was shown that in that instance the weight was treated as a 200-pound weight and there was no fraud or deception.
Eschweiler, J., dissents.
Appeal from a judgment of tbe municipal court of Milwaukee county: A. C. Baceus, Judge.
Reversed.
Action to enforce a penalty for a violation of sec. 1428 of tbe Ordinances of tbe City of Milwaukee (Milwaukee Code of 1914), wbicb provides that
“Any person, wbo, by bimself or by bis servant or agent, or as tbe servant or agent of another, shall use or retain in bis possession any false weight or measure or any weight or measure or weighing or measuring device to be used in tbe buying or selling of any commodity or thing which has not been sealed by the sealer of weights and measures according to- the provisions of this chapter,; or any person who, by himself or by his servant or agent, or as the servant or agent of another, shall sell or offer 'or expose for sale, or keep for the purpose of sale, less than the quantity he represents; or who shall in the purchase or offer to purchase of any thing represent such a thing to be of less than its true quantity; or who, by himself or by his servant or agent or as the servant or agent of another, shall use any false weight or measure in buying or selling any commodity or thing, or shall sell or offer or expose for sale, or keep for the purpose of sale, any commodity in a manner contrary to law or the provisions of this chapter, or 'any person, who, by himself or by his servant or agent, or as the servant or agent of another, shall sell or offer to sell or have in his possession for the purpose of selling, any device or machine to be used or calculated to falsify any weight or measure, shall upon a conviction forfeit to the city of Milwaukee a penalty of not less than twenty-five dollars, nor more than one hundred dollars.”
The evidence showed that the defendant, through a servant, bought a load of lead from one Schatz; that in weighing it a weight from an old abandoned scale, marked 100 pounds, was used; that on the scale upon which the lead was weighed such weight was the equivalent of a 200-pound weight, and Schatz was so told and consented to its use. In weighing the lead the weight was treated as a 200-pound weight and Schatz received payment in full for the true weight of the lead which the load contained. The trial court concluded that the defendant had not violated the ordinance in question, and from a judgment entered accordingly the plaintiff appealed.
Eor the appellant there were briefs by Clifton Williams, city attorney, and Benjamin W. Reynolds, assistant city attorney, and oral argument by Mr. Reynolds.
Eor the respondent there was a brief by Ohurchill, Bennett & Churchill, and oral argument by W. II. Churchill.

Opinion:
ViNJE, J.
It is obvious tbat in tbe instant case no damage resulted to tbe seller by reason of tbe use of tbe weight in question because tbe buyer correctly disclosed its value on tbe scale used. But tbe purpose of tbe ordinance was to require tbe use of weights and measures which themselves correctly express their value so that neither party shall be compelled to rely upon tbe representations of tbe other. Tbe intention was to require true weights and measures to be used so tbat recourse need be bad to such weights and measures only in order to determine tbe correct quantity weighed or measured. This intention is disclosed by tbe language used ; by tbe evident object sought to be reached; by tbe fact tbat other parts of tbe ordinance penalize tbe buyer who represents tbe quantity less than it is; and by tbat part thereof .forbidding tbe use of weights or measures not sealed by.tbe sealer of weights and measures. Tbe ordinance requires not only tbat true weights and measures be used, but tbat they shall have been tested and sealed by tbe designated authority, thus enabling any party to determine by an inspection of tbe weight or measure that it has been duly tested and sealed, and is correct. Manifestly tbe weight in question bad not been tested and sealed as a true weight on tbe scale used. It spoke falsely. - It said, I represent 100 pounds, when- in fact it represented 200 pounds. Tbe ordinance requires the language of tbe weight to be truthful, to tbe end tbat reliance need not be placed upon human representations, which may be affected more or less by self-interest. Tbe only way to reasonably safeguard tbe interests of buyers and sellers of commodities, as to weighing and measuring, is to require the use of instrumentalities tbat are in fact what they purport to be; tbat speak for themselves, and speak tbe truth. Any departure from such scheme opens tbe door to misrepresentations and fraud, tbe very door which tbe ordinance declares shall be closed.
The argument is made that defendant is not guilty because it is not shown that it was in the habit of using the weight as it did; that to constitute the using of false weights there must be shown more than one isolated instance of such use. The argument is not well taken. The ordinance unmistakably makes each false use a violation thereof. It makes no provision for occasional lapses. It does not require the city to establish customary delinquency before the penalty can attach. The ordinance forbids all use of false weights and measures and provides a penalty for each violation thereof.
By the Court. — Judgment reversed, and cause remanded with directions to enter a judgment of guilty, and for further proceedings according to law.