Citation Codes Equivalent Citations citation codes Docket Number 11780 Attorney(S) Messrs. William P. Greene and Dickson Miller, for appellant, cite: Where there is doubt as to whether a power to forbid is conferred upon a city by statute the doubt will be resolved against the city: 20 Enc. L., 1140. Provision to Act of 1924; 33 Stat., 893, is violative of Art. 3, Sec. 17, Const., 1895; 16 S.C. 47; 68 S.C. 148; 79 S.C. 191; 91 S.C. 450; 80 S.C. 130; 116 S.C. 193. Act constitutes destruction of business without due process of law: 45 Sou., 725. Messrs. Sullivan Sullivan, for respondent, cite: Inconsistent laws for different localities are constitutionally permissible: 21 S.C. 292. Title sufficiently explains purpose of act: 83 S.C. 232; 109 S.C. 413; 58 S.C. 415; 71 S.C. 457; Ann. Cas., 1916-D, 104; 78 A.S.R., 941. If there is doubt it should be resolved in favor of the act: 64 A.S.R., 64; 122 S.C. 476. See more information ... Smart Summary Please sign up to generate summary. FOWLER v. CITY OF ANDERSON ET AL. June 5, 1925. The opinion of the Court was delivered by MR. CHIEF JUSTICE GARY. For the reasons assigned by his Honor, the presiding Judge, the judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed. MESSRS. JUSTICES WATTS, COTHRAN and MARION concur.