City of Kansas City v. Jordan

Citations

• 99 Kan. 814
• 163 P. 188

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. City Ordinance — Transportation of Liquors — Powers of Cities of First Class. Under the laws of this state cities of the first class have power to pass ordinances regulating the transportation of intoxicating liquors for legal purposes and prohibiting such transportation for illegal purposes.</p> <p>2. Same — Sufficient Title to Ordinance. The ordinance attacked contains but one subject and that subject is clearly expressed in the title.</p> <p>3. SAUErr-Provisions of Ordinance — Consistent with State Laws. A city ordinance regulating the transportation of intoxicating liquors for legal purposes, and prohibiting such transportation for illegal purposes, is consistent with the law of this state regulating the transportation and delivery of intoxicating liquors.</p> <p>4. Same — Interstate Commerce. Such an ordinance as is mentioned in section 1 of this syllabus is not an unlawful regulation of interstate commerce.</p> <p>5. Same — Ordinance is Law of this State. Such an ordinance as is mentioned in section 1 of this syllabus is a law of this state within the meaning of the United States constitution, and of the Webb-Kenyon act (Part 1, 37 U. S. Stat. at Large, ch. 90, p. 699).</p> <p>6. Same — Unnecessary Allegations in Complaint. In charging an offense under a city ordinance, it is not necessary to¿ plead any of the exceptions named in the ordipance, where such exceptions are not contained in the clause which creates the offense.</p> <p>7. City Ordinance — Violating State Law — Invalid. An ordinance which attempts to regulate the transportation of intoxicating liquors within the city for legal purposes, and to prohibit such transportation for illegal purposes, but which does not permit the transportation of such liquors for all of the purposes recognized as legal by the law of the state, is invalid; and a judgment quashing a, complaint drawn under such an ordinance will be sustained.</p>