US SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

1. A municipal ordinance requiring that every person who goes from place to place taking orders for goods for future delivery and receives payment or any deposit of money in advance shall secure chanrobles.com-red

Page 268 U. S. 326

a license by paying: a fee and filing a bond conditioned to make final delivery of ordered goods held an unconstitutional interference with interstate commerce as applied to the solicitors of a corporation engaged in manufacturing goods in another state and selling them direct to consumers on orders taken by the solicitors and sent to the home office of the corporation, the customers making advance deposits which were retained by the solicitors as their sole competition and were credited to the customers on account of their purchases. P. 268 U. S. 335.

2. An expressed purpose to prevent possible frauds is not enough to justify legislation which really interferes with the free flow of legitimate interstate commerce. P. 268 U. S. 336.

297 F.8d 7 reversed.

Appeal from a decree of the circuit court of appeals which affirmed a decree of the district court dismissing the bill in a suit brought by the appellant corporation to enjoin the enforcement of a city ordinance requiring its salesmen to take out licenses and file bonds for security of customers. chanrobles.com-red

Page 268 U. S. 334