Commonwealth v. Brinton

Citations

• 132 Pa. 69
• 18 A. 1092
• 1890 Pa. LEXIS 770

Syllabus

<p>1. Under the act of April 2, 1830, P. L. 147, based upon the acts of March 30, 1784, 2 Sm. L. 99, and March 28, 1799, 3 Sm. L. 359, the hawking or peddling of goods, wares or merchandise in Philadelphia, with or without a license, is prohibited under a penalty of $50, saving to citizens the right so to sell goods, etc., of their own growth, product or manufacture.*</p> <p>2. When there is evidence that the defendant was found engaged in selling goods, wares and merchandise, as a hawker or peddler, within a prohibited district, the burden of proof is then upon him to show the special circumstances which gave him a right to sell goods in such manner, notwithstanding the general prohibition.</p> <p>3. The words, “foreign goods, wares and,merchandise,” so frequently employed in the several statutes relating to hawking or peddling, mean all goods not the “growth, product or manufacture of this state; ” these classes are constantly set over against each other, and there is no room for a third class: Hart v. Willetts, 62 Pa. 15; doubted: per Justice Williams.</p> <p>4. These statutes, with such restrictive provisions upon the sale of goods, wares and merchandise by hawking and peddling, are not unconstitutional, but are the proper exercise of a police power for the protection of society from the lawless able-bodied wanderer, whose presence in any community is a source of apprehension.</p>