City of St Louis v. Western Union Tel Co
| Citation | 149 U.S. 465,37 L.Ed. 810,13 S.Ct. 990 |
| Decision Date | 15 May 1893 |
| Docket Number | No. 94,94 |
| Parties | CITY OF ST. LOUIS v. WESTERN UNION TEL. CO |
| Court | United States Supreme Court |
[Statement of Case from pages 465-466 intentionally omitted] Mr. John F. Dillon, Mr. Rush Taggart and Mr. Elenenious Smith for petitioner.
[Argument of Counsel from page 466 intentionally omitted] Mr. Justice BREWER delivered the opinion of the court.
In the opinion heretofore announced it was said: 'We do not understand it to be questioned by counsel for the defendant that, under the constitution and laws of Missouri, the city of St. Louis has full control of its streets in this respect, and represents the public in relation thereto.' A petition for a rehearing has been filed, in which it is claimed that the court misunderstood the position of counsel, and, further, that in fact the city of St. Louis has no such control. Leave having been given therefor, briefs on the question whether such control exists have been filed by both sides, that of the telegraph company being quite full and elaborate.
We see no reason to change the views expressed as to the power of the city of St. Louis in this matter. Control over the streets resides somewhere. As the legislative power of a state is vested in the legislature, generally that body has the supreme control, and it delegates to municipal corporations such measure thereof as it deems best. The city of St. Louis occupies a unique position. It does not, like most cities, derive its powers by grant from the legislature, but it framed its own charter under express authority from the people of the state, given in the constitution. Sections 20, 21, art. 9, Const. Mo. 1875, authorized the election of 13 freeholders to prepare a charter to be submitted to the qualified voters of the city, which, when ratified by them, was to 'become the organic law of the city.' Section 22 provided for amendments, to be made at intervals of not less than two years and upon the approval of three-fifths of the voters. Sections 23 and 25 required the charter and amendments to always be in harmony with and subject to the constitution and laws of Missouri, and gave to the general assembly the same power over this city, notwithstanding the provisions of this article, as was had over other cities. In pursuance of these provisions of the constitution a charter was prepared and adopted, and is, therefore, the 'organic law' of the city of St. Lonis, and the powers granted by it, so far as they are in harmony with the constitution and laws of the state, and have not been set aside by any act of the general assembly, are the powers vested in the city. And this charter is an or- ganic act, so defined in the constitution, and is to be construed as organic acts are construed. The city is in a very just sense an 'imperium in imperio.' Its powers are self-appointed, and the reserved control existing in the general assembly does not take away this peculiar feature of its charter.
An examination of this charter (2 Rev. St. Mo. 1879, p. 1572 and following) will disclose that very large and general powers are given to the city, but it would unnecessarily prolong this opinion to quote the many sections defining these powers. It must suffice to notice those directly in point. Paragraph 2, § 26, art. 3, gives the mayor and assembly power, by ordinance, 'to establish, open, vacate, alter, widen, extend, pave, or otherwise improve and sprinkle, all streets, avenues, sidewalks, alleys, wharves, and public grounds and squares, and provide for the payment of the costs and expenses thereof in the manner in this charter prescribed; and also to provide for the grading, lighting, cleaning, and repairing the same, and to condemn private property for public uses, as provided for in this charter; to construct and keep in repair all bridges, streets, sewers, and drains, and to regulate the use thereof,' etc. The fifth paragraph of the same article grants power 'to license, tax, and regulate * * * telegraph companies or corporations, street-railroad cars,' etc. Article 6 treats of public improvements, including the opening of streets. Section 2 provides for condemning private property, and 'for establishing, opening, widening, or altering any street, avenue, alley, wharf, market place, or public square, or route for a sewer or water pipe.' By section 4 commissioners are to be appointed to assess the damages. By section 5 it is made the duty of these commissioners to ascertain the actual value of the land and premises proposed to be taken, and the actual damages done to the property thereby; 'and for the payment of such values and damages to assess against the city the amount of benefit to the public generally, and the balance against the owner or owners of all property which shall be specially benefited by the proposed improvement in the opinion of the commissioners, to the amount that each lot of such owner shall be benefited by the improvement.' Except, therefore for the special benefit done to the adjacent property, the city pays out of its treasury for the opening of streets, and this power of the city to open and establish streets, and the duty of paying the damages therefor out of the city treasury, were not created for the first time by this charter, but have been the rule as far back as 1839.
Further than that, with the charter was, as authorized by the constitution, a scheme for an enlargement of the boundaries of the city of St. Louis, and an adjustment of the relations consequent thereon between the city and the county. The boundaries were enlarged, and by section 10 of the scheme it was provided:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sea-Land Services, Inc. v. Municipality of San Juan
... ... strictures as regulate commerce between the states of the Union, the tax would still be constitutional under the rule of General Motors ... See Sprout v. City of South Bend, 277 U.S. 163, 48 S.Ct. 502, 72 L.Ed. 833 (1928). It is ... Western Live Stock v. Bureau of Revenue, 303 U.S. 250, 255, 58 S.Ct. 546, 548, 82 ... 252, 257, 39 S.Ct. 265, 63 L.Ed. 590 (1919); St. Louis v. Western Union Telegraph Co., 148 U.S. 92, 98, 13 S.Ct. 485, 487, 37 ... ...
-
State v. Superior Court of King County
... ... commission to raise rates for telephone service in a city ... above the rates fixed by ordinance granting the franchise to ... 65].' Home Telephone Company v ... Los Angeles, supra; St. Louis v. Western Union Tel ... Co., 149 U.S. 465, 13 S.Ct. 990, 37 L.Ed ... ...
-
Utah Power & Light Co. v. United States
... ... 329] ... William ... W. Ray, U.S. Atty., of Salt Lake City, Utah, and J. F ... Lawson, Asst. Sol. for Department of Agriculture, of ... generally accepted propositions that each state of the union ... is an independent sovereign and has all the rights and powers ... of ... Bernard (C.C.A.) 202 ... F. 728-731, 121 C.C.A. 190; St. Louis v. Western Union ... Telegraph Company, 149 U.S. 465, 13 Sup.Ct. 990, 37 ... ...
-
Atlantic Pacific Telegraph Company v. City of Philadelphia
... ... 326, 336, 346, 30 L. ed. 1200, 1201, 1205, 1 Inters. Com. Rep. 308, 7 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1118; Western U. Teleg. Co. v. Pendleton, 122 U. S. 347, 357, 30 L. ed. 1187, 1189, 1 Inters. Com. Rep. 306, 7 ... Western Union Packet Co. v. St. Louis, 100 U. S. 423, 25 L. ed. 688; Cincinnati, P. B. S. & P. Packet Co. v ... ...
-
Georgia Local Government Law: Court Resolution of County Government Disagreements - Paul Vignos
...art. IX, Sec. 20, as a way to facilitate the flexible development of St. Louis. In the leading case of City of St. Louis v. Western Union, 149 U.S. 465 (1893), the Missouri model was challenged as too restrictive of private industry. At issue was whether or not St. Louis could impose a rent......
-
INTRASTATE PREEMPTION: A NEW FRONTIER IN BURDENING CHOICE.
...(194) See BRIFFAULT & REYNOLDS, supra note 22, at 495-96. (195) See id. at 346-51, 495-96. (196) See St. Louis v. W. Union Tel. Co.. 149 U.S. 465, 468 (1893) (stating that the locality is like a government within a government or "imperium in (197) See Diller, Reorienting Home Rule: Part......