Hannibal Bridge Co. v. Schaubacker

• Decision Date: 31 March 1872
• Citation: 49 Mo. 555
• Parties: HANNIBAL BRIDGE COMPANY, Respondent, v. BERTHA H. SCHAUBACKER et al., Appellants.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

49 Mo. 555

HANNIBAL BRIDGE COMPANY, Respondent,

v.BERTHA H. SCHAUBACKER et al., Appellants.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

March Term, 1872.

Appeal from Hannibal Court of Common Pleas.

Carr, for appellants, cited Pacific R. R. Co. v. Chrystal, 25 Mo. 544; Louisiana Plank Road Co. v. Pickett, id. 535; Cadmus v. Central R.R. Co., 2 Vroom, 179; Hannibal & St. Jo. R.R. Co. v. Rowland, 29 Mo. 337.

Thos. H. Bacon, for respondent, cited Holmes v. Arundel, 3 Beav. 303, 305.

BLISS, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

The plaintiff instituted, in the Court of Common Pleas of the city of Hannibal, proceedings under the statute to condemn property to be taken for an approach to their bridge across the Mississippi. Part of defendant's property was embraced in the petition, and it is situated under a high rock bluff, which at that point approaches near the river. The whole property consisted of a brewery, malt-house, horse-power to force the water from the river to the brewery, and other appurtenances. The brewery lies in and against the bluff, while the other buildings are upon other lots across a road called Craig's alley, and nearer the river. The petition embraced only the lots upon which the malt-house, pump, etc., were situated, and those lots alone were taken. In reporting their appraisements to the court the committee made a special statement in regard to the brewery; in substance, that there is a malt mill-and horse-power upon the lot taken for the use of the brewery; that the water from the Mississippi is forced under Craig's alley to the brewery for its use; that the building of the railroad over the lots will so interfere with them that those appurtenances to the brewery will have to be removed west of Craig's alley in order to operate the brewery, and recommending that defendants be paid $600 in addition to the price of the lots taken for the injury to the brewery. This amount the court ordered to be paid them.

The defendants' counsel objected to the report, and offered evidence to show that the malt-house, horse-power and pump on the lot taken east of Craig's alley were essential to the brewery, and that it could not be operated without them; that they had been so connected since 1857, until torn down by the plaintiff's agent when commencing to cut down the grade; that the west side of the alley extends to the base of the rocky bluff 150 feet high, the brewery lot extending up the side of the bluff; that the brewery is partially built into the bluff, the rock having been excavated at great expense; that there is no room to build a maltmill, horse-power and stable on the brewery lot without excavating a large amount of rock; that the bridge company have graded their track opposite the brewery seven feet below the alley and the brewery; that it has been impossible for defendants to operate the brewery since plaint...