139 Ga. 126 | Ga. | 1912
The answer to the last question propounded by the Court of Appeals controls this case, namely: “Is the ordinance in question void as being an unlawful interference with interstate commerce?” If the ordinance is void, the question of whether the tax is void because it is unreasonable can not affect the result here reached. It would be unprofitable, therefore, to enter into a discussion of the first question propounded.
In the view we take of the case, the ordinance in question is absolutely void as being an unlawful interference with interstate commerce. The constitution of the United States declares that Congress shall have power “to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes.” Const. U. S. art. 1, sec. 8, par. 3 (Civil Code, § 6644). The question arises, therefore, whether telegraphic messages are commerce within the meaning of the constitution of the United States. This question has been answered in the affirmative by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Leloup v. Port of Mobile, 127 U. S. 640 (8 Sup. Ct. 1383, 32 L. ed. 311), in the following language: “Where a telegraph company is doing the business of transmitting messages between different States, and has accepted and is acting under the telegraph law passed by Congress July 24th, 1866, no State within which it sees fit to establish an office can impose upon it a license .tax, or require it to take out a license. 'for the transaction of such business.” “Telegraphic communications are commerce, as well as in the nature of postal service; and if carried on between different States, they are interstate commerce, and within the power of regulation conferred upon Congress, free from the control of State regulations, except such as are strictly of a police character; and any State regulations by way of tax on the occupation or business, or requiring a license to transact such business, are unconstitutional and void.” “A general license tax on a telegraph company affects its entire business, interstate as well as domestic or internal, and is unconstitutional.” In Western Union Tel. Co. v. Alabama State Board of Assessment, 132 U. S. 472, 473 (10 Sup. Ct. 161, 33 L. ed. 409), it was said that “The