City of St. Louis v. Schoenbusch

• Decision Date: 18 June 1888
• Citation: 95 Mo. 618,8 S.W. 791
• Parties: CITY OF ST. LOUIS v. SCHOENBUSCH.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

8 S.W. 791

95 Mo. 618

CITY OF ST. LOUIS v. SCHOENBUSCH.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

June 18, 1888.

1. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS — ORDINANCES — CRUELTY TO ANIMALS.

Though, by Rev. St. Mo. 1879, §§ 1375, 1609, it is made a misdemeanor to cruelly beat any horse, ox, or domestic animal, municipal corporations are not thereby incapacitated from prohibiting the same act by ordinance, and punishing offenders for violation thereof.

2. SAME.

The city of St. Louis, under the clause in its charter which authorizes the mayor and assembly to pass all such ordinances, not inconsistent with the charter or the state laws, as may be expedient in maintaining the peace and good government, health and welfare, of the city, and to enforce the same by fines and penalties, may pass an ordinance making it a misdemeanor to overdrive, overload, ill-treat, or cruelly beat any dumb animal.

Appeal from St. Louis criminal court; E. A. NOONAN, Judge.

Louis A. Steber, for appellant. L. Bell and Martin & Fauntleroy, for respondent.

BLACK, J.

The defendant was fined $20 by a police justice of the city of St. Louis on a charge of unnecessarily and cruelly beating a dumb animal. He appealed to the court of criminal correction, where he was again fined in a like amount; and he then appealed to this court. The prosecution is based on a violation of the following ordinance: "Section 1. Any person who shall, in this city, overdrive, overload, drive when overloaded, ill treat, torment, or unnecessarily or cruelly beat, or needlessly mutilate or kill, * * * any dumb animal, shall, for every such offense, be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction shall be fined not less than twenty dollars, nor more than one hundred dollars, for each offense."

At the close of the case for the city, the defendant moved for his discharge, which motion was overruled. The point made in the trial court and pressed here is that the ordinance is void — First, because the offense charged is punishable by the general statute laws of the state; and, second, because the city has no charter power to pass the ordinance. To cruelly beat any horse, ox, or domestic animal is made a misdemeanor by the general laws of the state (sections 1375, 1609, Rev. St. 1879;) but this does not prevent the city from prohibiting the same act by ordinance, and punishing the offender for a violation thereof. It is the well-settled law of this state that municipal corporations may by ordinance prohibit acts which are made misdemeanors under the general statutes of the state; and, for a violation of such ordinances, the city may maintain a proceeding in its own name to impose and collect a fine. City of St. Louis v. Bentz, 11 Mo. 61; City of St. Louis v. Cafferata, 24 Mo. 94; State v. Cowan, 29 Mo. 330; City of Independence v. Moore, 32 Mo. 392; Ex parte Hollwedell, 74 Mo. 395. The only debatable question is whether the city has the power to pass the ordinance. After the enumeration of various specific powers, authority is given to the mayor and assembly "to pass all such ordinances, not inconsistent with the provisions of this charter or the laws...