Show decision reversed last week in the supreme court of 0 the state a decision was handed down by judge prick frick reversing the decision of the district court in tho the case of park city vs clifford daniels it was hack back in 1913 when daniels who is representative of a big tea and coffee house of ogden was first arrested and tried in the tha justices court of 0 this city charged with wilfully and unlawfully engaged in the business or occupation of selling offering tor for sale bale soliciting and taking orders tor for goods wares and merchandise teas coffees spices and extracts without first having taken out and obtained a license contrary to the ordinances of 0 park city the ordinance referred to was drafted by evans evans when a member of that firm was city attorney of this city and unanimously passed by the common council to specially tax tas outside solicitors and vendors tho the case was prosecuted by frank evans who got a decision in the city ju justices salees court and when taken up on an appeal by the defendant to the third district court won on a decision given by judge loofburrow Loot burrow the case was carried up to the supreme court with the result above stated fortunately tuna tely there Is no comeback come back against the city for the case was tried solely on its merits in order to test the validity of the city ordinance in summing up the case judge prick frick said moreover does it require any argument to show that the discrimination Is also in fit favor of the local merchants in park city who thus practically escape from all competition from that source further can it reasonably bo be contended that the difference in the tax between subdivision a and the other two subdivisions b and ell c is a fair and reasonable one why demand the whole one hundred dollars under subdivision a in advance while under the other two subdivisions the tax is made payable quarterly only can it be tor for any other purpose than to prohibit the sale of all tho the articles mentioned in subdivision a and to permit the sale of 0 those mentioned in the other two subdivisions would not the enforcement of subdivision a have that effect indeed could it have any other while the city authorities of tho the cities of this state may impose license or occupation taxes and tor for that purpose may make reasonable classification yet the statute conferring the power I 1 in I 1 I 1 express terms also provides the manner mander ma n of the imposition of such taxes in the following words all such license fees and taxes shall be uniform in re the class upon which they are imposed the very statute therefore which grants the power also imposes the condition ot of uniformity |