City of St. Louis v. Atlantic Quarry and Construction Company

Decision Date29 June 1912
PartiesCITY OF ST. LOUIS v. ATLANTIC QUARRY AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, Appellant
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Appeal from St. Louis City Court of Criminal Correction. -- Hon. H N. Moore, Judge.

Reversed.

The city of St. Louis has the power to prescribe the conditions upon which a stone quarry may be operated; the provision in the ordinance in question that a special ordinance shall be secured for the operation of a quarry, and the provision that this condition shall not affect those who were operating quarries at the time of the passage of the ordinance in question, are not discriminative, but are the exercise of a valid charter power. Charter, art. 3, sec. 26, cls. 6; Dillon on Mun. Corps. (5 Ed.), 598; City v. Howard, 119 Mo 47; City v. Fischer, 167 Mo. 654; Fischer v. City, 194 U.S. 361.

BROWN C. Bond, C., dissents. Woodson, J., concurs in separate opinion.

OPINION

BROWN, C.

This cause was instituted in the first district police court of the city of St. Louis, August 15, 1905, by filing the following statement:

"Atlantic Quarry & Construction Co., a corporation,

"To the city of St. Louis, Dr.,

"To five hundred -- no-100 dollars, for the violation of an ordinance of said city, entitled "An Ordinance in revision of the General Ordinance of the City of St. Louis," being ordinance number 19991, section 615, approved April 3, 1900.

"In this, to-wit: In the city of St. Louis, and State of Missouri, on the 8th day of August, 1905, and on divers other days and times prior thereto, the said Atlantic Quarry and Construction Company, a corporation, duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Missouri, did then and there operate, carry on and work a stone quarry on a lot of ground situated at the southwest corner of Bernard street and Montrose avenue, in the city of St. Louis, Missouri, without permission to do so having been first obtained from the municipal assembly of said city by proper ordinance. It is further alleged that the said stone quarry was not operated, carried on or worked at the time of the approval of the aforesaid section 615 of ordinance 19991 of said city of St. Louis, Missouri.

"Contrary to the ordinance in such case made and provided.

"On information of Arthur Ryan.

"Thos. Anderson,

"City Attorney of the city of St. Louis."

A judgment for one hundred dollars was appealed to the St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction where a trial resulted in a verdict and judgment for the same amount, which is brought here by appeal. The ordinance mentioned in the statement is as follows:

"It shall not be lawful for any person, company of persons, firm or corporation, to work a stone quarry or to operate, conduct or carry on a brick kiln, or a soap factory, or a slaughter-house, or a garbage works, or a bone factory, or a rendering factory, or a livery stable, or a vitriol factory, or a tannery, or candle works in any building or on any lot of ground in the city without permission to do so has been first obtained from the municipal assembly by a proper ordinance, nor shall any existing house, shed or structure be used, altered, changed, removed or repaired so as to establish, conduct, open, carry on or maintain any such business or occupation therein without similar authority. Any person, company of persons, firm or corporation violating the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be fined not less than one hundred nor more than five hundred dollars for each and every day such stone quarry, brick kiln, soap factory, slaughter-house, garbage works, bone factory, rendering factory, livery stable, vitriol factory, tannery or candle works is worked, operated or carried on without the authority of the municipal assembly so to do by proper ordinance. Provided, however, that nothing in this section shall be deemed to apply to any person or company of persons, firm or corporation who shall at the time of the passage of this section be operating or carrying on a stone quarry, or a brick kiln, or soap factory, or slaughter-house, or garbage works, or bone factory, or rendering factory, or livery stable, or vitriol factory, or tannery, or candle works, at or in the premises occupied by them at the time of the passage of this section." [McQuillin's Municipal Code, p. 553, sec. 615.]

The testimony tended to show that the defendant at the time charged was doing the work complained of for the Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis, as assignee of Louis Skrainka and Michael Hanick, in pursuance of a contract in writing between the said association as party of the first part and the said Skrainka and Hanick as party of the second part the material portion of which is as follows:

"That in consideration of the payments and covenants hereinafter mentioned, to be made and performed by said party of the first part, the said parties of the second part hereby agree to execute the following described work, to-wit:

"Any or all the necessary rock excavation on city blocks numbered 2550, 2551, 2552, 2237, 2238, 2239, 2240 and part of block 2553, of the city of St. Louis and adjacent streets within these blocks; said excavation to be made to an established grade as directed by the engineer of the railroad company or its representative, and the work to be done in such manner and at such points as the engineer of the railroad company or its representative may direct. The party of the first part agrees to remove all the earth excavation above the rock.

"The party of the first part reserves the right as to how much of the rock the second party may excavate. The party of second part agrees to deliver to the party of the first part all of said rock, or such portion thereof as party of the first part may demand during the time of excavation, in the form of riprap and macadam at $ 2.25 per square of 100 cu. ft. for riprap f. o. b. cars at quarry tracks and $ 2.50 per square of 100 ft. for macadam f. o. b. cars quarry track. The party of the second part further agrees to satisfy the daily demand of the party of the first part not to exceed squares per day.

"It is understood that the meaning of this contract is to insure the excavation to a grade of solid rock located on city blocks mentioned. All work to be performed in a thorough workmanlike manner and with such dispatch as may be required by the party of the first part."

The work consisted in reducing the land to the proper level for the tracks of the Terminal Association by removing the material, consisting of "strippings" and solid rock to a depth of from a few inches to twenty feet, and also removing solid rock below the grade so as to make a hole in which to put the "strippings," which would otherwise have had to be moved, at great cost, to a dumping ground at East St. Louis. At the time this proceeding was instituted, a hole had been excavated about two hundred and fifty feet long, eighty feet wide and seventy-odd feet deep. The rock to be moved was broken and crushed on the ground, to be used as provided in the contract. The work was done under the supervision of the engineer of the Terminal Association. The title to the land is in a trustee for the Terminal Association, which is in possession.

The defendant requested the following instruction, among others: "The court declares the law to be that if the Terminal Railroad Association at the time mentioned in the complaint herein was owner of the property described in the complaint herein, and as such owner made and entered into the contract in writing with Hanick and Skrainka which was read in evidence and that all the work of excavating was done under and by virtue and authority of said contract, then the defendant is not guilty of a violation of section 615 of the revised ordinances of the city of St. Louis."

It was refused and defendant excepted.

During the trial, and in its motion for a new trial, the defendant insisted upon the several constitutional questions suggested in this opinion.

Municipal corporations, with us, are created by the statute. They possess no powers or faculties not conferred upon them, either expressly or by fair implication, by the law which creates them, or by other statutes applicable to them. [1 Dil. Mun. Corps. (5 Ed.), sec. 33.] Every investigation, therefore, relating to their powers, must be conducted from the stand-point of the law to which they owe their existence. The charter of the city of St. Louis is founded upon express provisions of the Constitution itself, which direct not only that it shall be subject to the Constitution and laws of the State, but that it shall be in harmony with them. It also requires "a house of legislation," leaving no doubt as to the legislative character of the municipal assembly which was created by its authority. [Constitution, art. 9, sec. 22.]

Among the legislative powers expressly delegated by the charter to the mayor and municipal assembly (art. 3, sec 26, clause 6) are the following: "To establish and regulate hospitals, and to secure the general health of the inhabitants by any measure necessary; to regulate stone quarries and quarrying of stone, and the slaughter of animals; provide for the erection, management and regulation of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
25 cases
  • Marshall v. Kansas City
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • April 9, 1962
    ... ... Hemenway, Asst. City Counselor, St. Louis, for City of St. Louis, amici curiae ... 18, 218 S.W. 331, 333; City of St. Louis v. Atlantic Quarry & Construction Co., 244 Mo. 479, 488, 148 S.W. 948 ... ...
  • Sager v. City of Stanberry
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 21, 1934
    ... ... Allen, James Wilson and Missouri Service Company, a Corporation, Appellants, v. The City of Stanberry, a ... 46, 47, Art. IV, Const. of Mo.; ... St. Louis v. Atlantic Quarry & Const. Co., 244 Mo ... 479, 148 ... approximately two thousand. The construction of a municipal ... electrical plant and system for the ... ...
  • Haeussler Investment Company v. Bates
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 30, 1924
    ... ...          Appeal ... from St. Louis City Circuit Court; Hon. Franklin ... Ferriss , Judge ... provisions providing for the construction of streets, alleys ... or sewers, and charging the cost of ... ...
  • City of St. Louis v. Kellman
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • July 18, 1922
    ... ... St ... Louis v. Construction Co., 244 Mo. 479. The charter of ... St. Louis is founded upon express ... Popular Bluff, 263 Mo. 516-534; St. Louis v ... Atlantic Quarry Co., 244 Mo. 479; St. Louis v ... Dreisverner, 243 Mo. 217; ... McKinley v. United States, 249 U.S. 397; ... Plymouth Coal Company v. Pennsylvania, 232 U.S. 542 ... (9) An ordinance regulating the ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT