People ex rel. Berlizheimer v. Busse

83 N.E. 175, 231 Ill. 251
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 17, 1907
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 83 N.E. 175 (People ex rel. Berlizheimer v. Busse) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People ex rel. Berlizheimer v. Busse, 83 N.E. 175, 231 Ill. 251 (Ill. 1907).

Opinion

Mr. Chief Justice Hand

delivered the opinion of the court:

It is clear, we think, under a proper title the legislature has the right, under the exercise of its police power, to pass an act prohibiting the sale of cigarettes. It is, however, apparent that it has not the power to prohibit the sale of cigarettes under the title of an act which only provides for the regulation of the sale of cigarettes, and if it were clear that section 1 of said act was intended to absolutely prohibit the sale of cigarettes we should have no hesitation in holding that the act, in so far as it attempted to absolutely prohibit the sale of cigarettes, was broader than its title and the act was unconstitutional and void. We think, however, when the act is read as a whole it is apparent that it does not prohibit, absolutely, the sale of cigarettes, but only the sale of cigarettes which contain substances deleterious to health, and that it was not intended, by section 1 of the act, to absolutely prohibit the sale of cigarettes which contained only pure tobacco, and that section 1 of the act applies only to cigarettes which contain substances deleterious to health, which would include cigarettes made of tobacco which was deleterious to health by reason of being impregnated with drugs or otherwise. The relator averred in the petition that he desired a license to sell cigarettes which were manufactured only from pure tobacco, and the ordinance of the city of Chicago authorized a license to issue for the sale of cigarettes of that quality. We think, therefore, that the trial court did not err in awarding to the relator the writ of mandamus.

The judgment of the superior court will be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Johnson v. Halpin
108 N.E.2d 429 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1952)
Commonwealth Ex Rel. City of Wilmore v. McCray
61 S.W.2d 1043 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1933)
Moroney v. Allman
271 Ill. App. 336 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1933)
Grove ex rel. Roy Hamm Post No. 101 American Legion v. Board of Supervisors
246 Ill. App. 241 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1927)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
83 N.E. 175, 231 Ill. 251, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-berlizheimer-v-busse-ill-1907.