Rosenberry, C. J.
The defendant contends that the ordinance in question, which is printed in the margin, is void *382for the reason that it is in conflict with the provisions of the constitution of the state of Wisconsin and of the constitution of the United States because it is discriminatory, in that it applies only to persons, firms, or corporations taking orders for merchandise, which persons reside in other cities or towns than the city of Edgerton, and therefore does not apply to local mercantile houses in the city of Edgerton, Wisconsin. The brief is devoted to a discussion of the question whether or not the ordinance in question is void under the interstate commerce clause of the constitution of the United States. It is not necessary for the court to consider that question. While the ordinance is not identical in language with the ordinance considered by this court in Whipple v. South Milwaukee, 218 Wis. 395, 261 N. W. 235, it is with respect to discrimination the same in legal effect. We must therefore hold that the ordinance in question is invalid for the reasons stated in Whipple v. South Milwaukee, supra. No useful purpose will be served by a discussion of the considerations which led to the conclusion in that case, as they were there fully set forth.
By the Court. — The judgment appealed from is reversed, and cause remanded with directions to discharge the defendant.