Ex parte Ah Pong
Before: Baldwin
Synopsis
The mere fact that a party is a Chinaman, residing in a mining district of this State, does not subject Mm to the foreign miners’ license tax.
If the Revenue Act of 1861 (Stat. 1861, 447, secs. 90, 93) is to be construed as imposing this tax under such circumstances merely, the act is unconstitutional.
Baldwin, J. delivered the opinion of the Court Field, C. J. and Cope, J. concurring.
The prisoner must be discharged. The mere fact that the petitioner was a Chinaman residing in a mining district, does not subject him to the foreign miners’ tax. If the act is to be construed as imposing this tax, it cannot be supported, any more than could a law be sustained which imposed upon every man residing in a given section of the State a license as a merchant, whatever his occupation.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)