Seifert

This action is to recover from the defendant, Seifert, the sum of $120, the amount of a li *596 cense tax imposed upon his business as a saloon-keeper for a period of twelve months, under an ordinance of the board of supervisors.

The cause was tried by the court, and findings and judgment passed in favor of plaintiff, and the defendant appeals from the judgment, and an order denying his motion for a new trial.

Appellant contends that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, in that,— 1. Facts are not alleged showing the existence of the ordinance; and 2. That the complaint fails to show a violation of the ordinance upon which the action is founded. Upon this ground, defendant objected in proper time to the introduction of any evidence.

Neither of these points is well taken. The complaint alleges “ that under and by virtue of the provisions of an ordinance of the board of supervisors of said county duly passed and approved at a regular meeting of the board held on the twenty-second day of January, A. D. 1890, and thereafter- duly published as required by law, said ordinance being known as ordinance No. "48 of the ordinances of the county of…