Adams Express Co. v. New York, ante, p.
232 U. S. 14,
followed to the effect that certain municipal ordinances of the
City of New York are void and unconstitutional as applied to the
interstate commerce of express companies.
189 F. 268 reversed.
The facts, which involve the constitutionality under the
commerce clause of the federal Constitution of certain ordinances
of the City of New York as applied to the interstate business of
express companies, are stated in the opinion.
Page 232 U. S. 36
MR. JUSTICE HUGHES delivered the opinion of the Court.
This suit was brought by the complainant as treasurer of the
United States Express Company to restrain the enforcement against
that company of certain license requirements contained in the
ordinances of the City of New York. The ordinances are the same as
those which were under consideration in
Adams Express Co. v.
New York, decided this day, and the decree of the circuit
court was to the same effect in both cases. 189 F. 268.
The United States Express Company is an unincorporated
association, organized under the laws of New York, and is
extensively engaged in interstate commerce as a common carrier of
packages. Over 98 percent of its total business in New York City
consists of the handling of traffic in interstate transportation.
The interstate shipments in New York City are hauled by the
company's wagons to and from the rail terminals of the Central
Railroad of New Jersey, the Lehigh Valley Railroad, and the
Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad, all within the State
of New Jersey. It employs in its business 343 express wagons, of
which 189 are stabled in and operated exclusively from Jersey City,
New Jersey, 123 are similarly kept in Communipaw, New Jersey, and
the remainder, or 31, are kept in the Borough of Manhattan. Both
the local and interstate traffic are handled in these wagons
indiscriminately. The company has never taken out any licenses in
the City of New York for its wagons or drivers.
The questions are the same as those which were presented in
Adams Express Co. v. New York supra, and a like
Page 232 U. S. 37
decree should be entered restraining the enforcement of the
ordinances against the company with respect to the conduct of its
interstate business and its wagons and drivers employed in
interstate commerce.
The decree of the Circuit Court is reversed, and the case is
remanded to the district court, with direction to enter a decree in
favor of the complainant in conformity with this opinion.
It is so ordered.