Decker v. City of Wichita

Citations

• 109 Kan. 796
• 202 P. 89
• 1921 Kan. LEXIS 371

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. License Tax — Motor Busses — Jitneys—Municipal Control of Public Streets — Valid City Ordinance. Following Desser v. City of Wichita, 96 Kan. 820, it is held:</p> <p>(First) That a city ordinance regulating street traffic which excludes those operating motor vehicles carrying passengers for hire from soliciting or receiving passengers within a certain zone of the city where there is street-car service, is not an unlawful discrimination, nor so arbitrary and unreasonable as to be invalid.</p> <p>(Second) Such legislation is enacted for the public welfare, and not merely to benefit a particular common carrier, and the fact that the measure may result in great benefit to one carrier and great loss to another of a different class, will not necessarily destroy the validity of the ordinance.</p> <p>(Third) Whether the public welfare would be best subserved by extending traffic privileges to a street railway company and by withholding them from those operating motor vehicles within a certain zone of the city, is a legislative question, and the court may not substitute its judgment, as to what the public good requires, for that of the city commission intrusted by law with the discretion and power to determine the question.</p> <p>2. Same — City Ordinance Properly Amended. Upon an examination of the amendatory ordinance which set forth the complete section as amended, it is held that it is not invalid because it did not set out other sections of the ordinance which were not amended.</p> <p>3. Same — City Ordinance — Only One Subject in Title. The ordinance is held to cover but a single subject, which is sufficiently expressed in its title.</p>