City of St. Louis v. Warren Commission & Investment Co.

• Decision Date: 01 March 1910
• Citation: 226 Mo. 148,126 S.W. 166
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court
• Parties: CITY OF ST. LOUIS v. WARREN COMMISSION & INVESTMENT CO.

126 S.W. 166

226 Mo. 148

CITY OF ST. LOUIS v. WARREN COMMISSION & INVESTMENT CO.

Supreme Court of Missouri. Division No. 1.

March 1, 1910.

1. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (§ 603) — ORDINANCES — REGULATION OF BUILDINGS — CONSTRUCTION.

The purpose of an ordinance, providing that every building more than three stories high above the basement, occupied for manufacturing or mercantile purposes, shall have fire doors or shutters on every opening above the first story, etc., and providing that the commissioner of public buildings shall require fire doors and shutters to be placed on the openings of buildings, where lots, which were vacant when the buildings were constructed, are built on so that the openings come within 40 feet of any building, is to guard against fires and the destruction of property by reason of the particular occupancy of a building, and it applies to all four-story buildings used for the purposes mentioned, irrespective of the date of construction.

2. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (§ 603) — POLICE POWER — ORDINANCES.

St. Louis City Charter, art. 3, § 26, cl. 12 (Ann. St. 1906, p. 4818), authorizing the Assembly through its officers to examine all buildings and ascertain their condition for health and safety, and to provide for the safe construction and repairs of all buildings, and to pass all such ordinances as may be expedient in maintaining the peace, health, and welfare of the city, etc., authorizes the adoption of an ordinance providing that every building more than three stories high above the basement, occupied for manufacturing or mercantile purposes, shall have fire doors or shutters on every opening above the first story, etc.

3. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (§ 603) — POLICE POWER — ORDINANCES.

An ordinance, requiring every building more than three stories high above the basement, occupied for manufacturing or mercantile purposes, to have fire doors or shutters on every opening above the first story, is a reasonable police regulation, calculated to promote the general welfare of the citizens, and the individual rights of the citizen must be surrendered to the extent of a compliance therewith.

4. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (§ 642) — ORDINANCES — REASONABLENESS.

On a trial for violating a municipal ordinance, the question of the unreasonableness of the ordinance is not raised without a pleading or proof that it is.

5. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (§ 112) — ORDINANCES — TITLE.

A provision in an ordinance that every building more than three stories high above the basement, occupied for manufacturing or mercantile purposes, shall have fire doors or shutters on every opening above the first story, construed to apply to all four-story buildings used for the purposes mentioned, irrespective of the date of the construction, is germane to the title "An ordinance to revise the Building Code, * * * by repealing sections, * * * and enacting in lieu thereof a new ordinance governing the construction and erection, reconstruction, * * * removal, and securing of buildings in the city."

Appeal from St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction; Hiram N. Moore, Judge.

The Warren Commission & Investment Company was convicted of violating an ordinance of the City of St. Louis, and appeals. Affirmed.

Truman P. Young, for appellant. L. E. Walther and Chas. P. Williams, for respondent.

GRAVES, J.

This cause originated in the first district of the police court of the city of St. Louis by a statement filed by the city attorney of said city, in which it was charged that the defendant had violated sections 101, 182, and 184 of ordinance No. 22,022, approved April 7, 1905. Upon being convicted the defendant appealed to the St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction, wherein he was again convicted, and fined the sum of $25, from which judgment he has appealed to this court.

Defendant is the owner and occupant of a certain building four stories high, and used for manufacturing and mercantile purposes. This building was erected prior to 1865. There is no question that the building had not been equipped with the things required by section 101 of ordinance No. 22,022, supra. This section is a part of the Building Code of the city of St. Louis and reads: "Every building more than three stories in height, above the basement, occupied for manufacturing or mercantile purposes, shall have fire doors, blinds or shutters hung to iron hinge eyes or pin blocks built into the wall on every window and every opening above the first story thereof, excepting on openings of buildings fronting on streets or vacant lots which are more than forty feet in width; said doors, shutters or blinds shall be standard; constructed of pine or other soft wood of two thicknesses of matched boards at right angles with each other and securely fastened and covered with tin or galvanized iron on both sides and edges, with folding lapped joints; the nails for fastening the same shall be driven inside the lap. The hinges and bolts or latches shall be secured or fastened to the door or shutter by bolting after the same has been covered, and such door or shutter shall be hung independent of the woodwork of the windows and doors and to be of sufficient area to lap two inches all around such opening. Sliding shutters of the above construction may be used instead of hinged shutters, of such mechanism as may be approved by the commissioner of public buildings. They shall in any case comply with all requirements provided for standard hinged fire shutters. In lieu of standard fire doors and shutters wherever mentioned in this ordinance, approved metal frames of adequate strength, with wire glass panels in same may be used. It shall be the duty of the commissioner of public buildings to require fire doors, blinds or shutters, as provided in this section, to be placed on the openings of buildings in cases where lots which were vacant when the buildings were constructed are built upon, so that said openings become within forty feet from any building." The case was tried upon an agreed statement of facts, which it is not necessary to set out here, for the reason that the defendant is guilty if the ordinance is valid, and if the ordinance applies to the building in question under the facts.

The contention of the defendant is three-fold, and is well stated in the brief thus: "The evidence showed that the building in question was erected in St. Louis prior to 1865. Ordinance No. 22,022, under which this prosecution was brought, was passed on April 7, 1905. It was contended by the defendant at the trial that this ordinance applied only to buildings erected after its passage. In the first place, that the ordinance on its face applied only to such buildings; in the second place, that the city has no powers under its charter to pass such an ordinance and make it applicable to buildings already constructed; and in the third place, that the title of the ordinance refers only to buildings to be erected in the future, with certain exceptions not applicable here." Of these questions in their order.

1. The...