Peters v. St. Louis & Iron Mountain R.R. Co.

Decision Date31 March 1856
Citation23 Mo. 107
PartiesPETERS, Plaintiff in Error, v. THE ST. LOUIS AND IRON MOUNTAIN RAILROAD CO., Defendant in Error.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

23 Mo. 107

PETERS, Plaintiff in Error,
v.
THE ST. LOUIS AND IRON MOUNTAIN RAILROAD CO., Defendant in Error.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

March Term, 1856.


1. Sec. 12 of the “Act to authorize the formation of railroad associations and to regulate the same,” approved February 24th, 1853, (Sess. Acts, 1853, p. 128,) is applicable to the St. Louis & Iron Mountain Railroad Company, and to all other railroad companies existing under a law of the state.

2. It is constitutional in its application to railroad corporations previously created.

Error to St. Louis Law Commissioners' Court.

The petition in this cause is as follows: “The plaintiff states that Emil Rebhan was a contractor with the defendant from some time previous to the first day of December, 1854, to the 20th of March, 1855, for the construction of that part of the said railroad, in said county of St. Louis, which lies between a point about two hundred feet south of the River des Peres and McGilton's stone quarry, and which is now, and has been for more than a year, in progress of construction; and that the following persons respectively performed for said contractor, as laborers, in constructing said railroad, the following services, at the following times, and for the following prices, rates and amounts, to-wit:

NAMES.
No. of days.
WORKING TIME.
Rate per day.
AMOUNT.
1855.
Anton Kramer
11
From Feb. 10 to Mar. 10,
$1 00
$11 50
George Weiland
9
From Feb. 28 to Mar. 20,
1 25
11 25
Jacob Mueller
9
From Feb. 22 to Mar. 12,
1 00
9 50
Christian Kehling
13
From Feb. 12 to Mar. 19,
1 00
13 00
Johann Zepp
19 3/4
From Feb. 7 to Mar. 10,
1 00
19 75
Joseph Rederer
10
From Feb. 12 to Mar. 13,
1 50
15 00
E. Freudeuruh
10
From Feb. 12 to Mar. 13,
1 00
10 00
Jacob Rause
10
From Feb. 22 to Mar. 20,
1 25
12 50
Franz Weigdo
7
From Feb. 28 to Mar. 20,
1 00
7 00
Larez Speidder
10
From Feb. 10 to Mar. 20,
1 00
10 00
Barnbored
9
From Feb. 27 to Mar. 17,
1 00
9 00
George Puempel
15
From Feb. 15 to Mar. 20,
1 00
15 00
Martin Schultheep
6
From Feb. 27 to Mar. 10,
1 00

6 00

[23 Mo. 108]

“The plaintiff further states, that each of said laborers gave notice, in writing, to the said company, within twenty days after the performance of the number of days' labor for which the claim herein set forth is made; that is to say, each of said notices was given by said laborers respectively on the 28th day of March, 1855, and each of said notices stated the amounts respectively and number of days' labor, and the time when said labor was performed for which each claim herein set forth is made, and the said name of said contractor, from whom due, and was signed by each of the laborers, or his attorney, giving said notice, were, on said 28th day of March, 1855, personally served on John Kelly, an engineer employed by said company, having charge of the section of said...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • State ex rel. Garner v. Missouri & Kansas Telephone Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • June 1, 1905
    ......391; Reagan v. F.C.T. Co., . 154 U.S. 362; St. Louis, etc., v. Gill, 156 U.S. 649; Cov. T. Pike v. Sanford, ... Mathews. v. Railroad, 121 Mo. 298: Peters v. Railroad, 23 Mo. 107. . . ......
  • Santa Clara County v. Southern Pac. R. Co.
    • United States
    • D. California
    • September 17, 1883
    ......312; City. of Metrop. Bank, 27 La.Ann. 648; Iron City Bank v. Pittsburgh, 37 Pa.St. 340; State v. Miller, ... . . [ 47 ] Bank v. Hamilton Co. 21 Ill. 53; Peters. v. Railroad Co. 23 Mo. 107; Thorpe v. R. & B.R. Co. 27 ...Co. 42 Conn. 105. . . . [ 56 ] St. Louis v. Boatman's Ins. & T. Co. 47 Mo. 155. . . . [ 57 ] ......
  • Noble State Bank v. Haskell
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oklahoma
    • September 11, 1909
    ......(Republic Iron & Steel Co. v. State, 160 Ind. 379, 385, 66 N.E. 1005, 62 ...Railroad Co., 27 Vt. 140, 62 Am. Dec. 625; Peters v. Railroad Co., 23 Mo. 107; Cooley's Const. Lim. (3d Ed.) ......
  • Tranbarger v. Chicago & Alton Railroad Company
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • May 10, 1913
    ......656;. Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge, 11 Peters,. 603; Walla Walla v. Water Co., 172 U.S. 9; Hovel. v. ......
  • 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