¶1The defendant is prosecuted for refusing and neglecting to pay the license tax, as required by chapter 12, section 7, of the ordinances of the city of Goldsboro. The special verdict is fatally defective, in that it fails to clearly allege the trade or occupation carried on by the defendant, and to set forth the specific provisions of the ordinance which it is alleged was violated by the defendant. Evidently a very important question concerning interstate commerce was intended to be presented, but we cannot consider it upon this verdict. According to the ruling in State v. Corporation, 111 N. C., 661, there must be a New Trial.
113 N.C. 628
State v. Finlayson
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided September 15, 1893
Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1893-09-15
Indictment for failure to pay a license tax imposed by an ordinance of the city of Goldsboro, tried before Brown, J., at April Term, 1893, of Wayne Superior Court. The jury found a special verdict as follows: “1. That the city of Goldsboro, under its charter, by its regularly constituted authorities, on the 1st day of June, 1892, adopted the following ordinance: . Ordinance 12. “‘ Be it ordained by the Aldermen of the city of Goldsboro: “ ‘Section 1.
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently November 1934
2 state decisions
Key passage — most relied on by later courts
“Evidently a very important question concerning interstate commerce was intended to be presented, but we cannot consider it upon this verdict.”
quoted by 1 later decision, including State v. . Hanner
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1893-09-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →