150 Ga. 294 | Ga. | 1920
1. The Western Union Telegraph Company brought suit against the Town of Dexter and others, to enjoin the collection of an annual occupation tax of $5 imposed upon the telegraph comjiany by the town. The case was submitted to the trial judge for decision without the intervention of a jury; and he heard and determined all issues of law and fact. After the introduction of
The criminal prosecution is a mere incident to enforce the collection of the tax sought to be enjoined, and the case falls within that class, the last of which was Baldwin v. City of Atlanta, 147 Ga. 28 (92 S. E. 630). This class of cases is to the effect that equity will enjoin criminal prosecutions under certain circumstances there set out. The instant case does not fall within the other class, which holds that a court of equity, as a general rule, will not enjoin prosecutions for criminal offenses, etc. See cases cited in the Baldwin case, supra.
2. The ordinance of the Town of Dexter imposed an annual tax of $5 upon the intrastate business done'by the telegraph company in the Town of Dexter, and the ordinance specifically provides that such tax is not imposed upon the interstate business. The evidence introduced on the trial of the case was very meager. It showed that the gross annual receipts from the intrastate business done at Dexter were $70.68, but the record does not disclose definitely what the expenses of the Dexter office were. The nearest approach to it was as follows: “ 25.1 of the entire expenses for said year in Georgia is the expense apportionable to the intrastate expense.” From this meager evidence counsel for the defendant in error makes a calculation in his brief in which he reaches the conclusion that the expenses on intrastate business in the Town of Dexter arc $65,596+. The burden of proof is upon the plaintiff to make out its case; and where such attack is made because of extrinsic facts, the ordinance will not be declared invalid where the party attacking fails to carry such burden. The evidence in this case does not sustain the allegation that the tax imposed by the ordinance of the Town of Dexter is excessive, discriminatory, or
Judgment reversed.