County of Inyo v. Erro

Citations

• 119 Cal. 119
• 51 P. 32
• 1897 Cal. LEXIS 865

Syllabus

<p>County Ordinance—License to Persons Engaged in Sheep Business— Yahdity—Construction of County Government Act.—A county ordinance requiring the procurement of a license by “every person engaged in the business of raising, grazing, herding, or pasturing sheep in the county,” is valid, and within the power conferred upon boards of supervisors under subdivision 27 of section 25 of the County Government Act of 1893, authorizing them “to license for purposes of regulation and revenue all and every kind of business not prohibited by law and transacted and carried on within the county,” and it is no objection to the validity of the ordinance that it uses the words “engaged in,” instead of the words “transacted and carried on” employed in the act, as each form of expression involves the other in its meaning.</p> <p>Id.—Applicability of Ordinance—Passage of Sheep through County— Grazing and Pasturage—Question of Fact—Findings—Conflict of Evidence.—Though such ordinance is not applicable to one who merely drives a band of sheep through a county, yet the license tax cannot be evaded, when it is evident that the real object in so doing, and what is really done is to graze and pasture the sheep in the county, and the determination of what is the real object is a question of fact; and where the trial court finds as a fact, under conflicting evidence, that for a period of time the defendant was engaged in the business of raising, grazing, herding, and pasturing sheep in the county, its findings will not be disturbed upon appeal.</p>