Hawthorn v. City of St. Louis

• Decision Date: 31 October 1847
• Citation: 11 Mo. 59
• Parties: HAWTHORN v. CITY OF ST. LOUIS.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

11 Mo. 59

HAWTHORN

v.CITY OF ST. LOUIS.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

October Term, 1847.

ERROR TO ST. LOUIS CIRCUIT COURT

SPALDING, for Plaintiff.

HAIGHT, for Defendant. The only question in this case is, whether the city, being a municipal and public corporation, is liable to this process. This court, in the case of Cohen v. Perpetual Ins. Co. 9 Mo. R., held, that a corporation is liable to this process, under our statute. In Massachusetts, a different result had been arrived at. Union Turnpike Co. v. Jenkins, 2 Mass. 37; New England Marine Ins. Co. v. Chandler, 16 Mass. 275, 277. The court below, however, proceeded upon the principle that though private corporations might be liable to this process, yet it was not applicable to public and municipal corporations, they being merely agents for the public, were more like public officers. In this case, the object is to reach the salary of an officer of this corporation. The defendant is a corporation acting for the public, and it is against public policy that corporations of this kind should be compelled to enter into contests between debtor and creditor.

MCBRIDE, J.

Jacob Hawthorn being an execution creditor of M. L. Clark, who was recorder of the City of St. Louis, caused the said city to be summoned as garnishee, under the provisions of the statute, to be found in Rev. Code, 1835, p. 254. The city, through its mayor, answered, admitting that there was a balance due to said Clark from said city, as part of his salary as recorder; but submits whether the city is subject to this proceeding, at the instance of a creditor of the recorder, for the purpose of recovering his salary. The Circuit Court dismissed the garnishment. The plaintiff, Hawthorn, excepted, and has brought the case to this court by writ of error.

The only question on the record is, whether the salary of an officer of the corporation can be made subject to the payment of an execution against such officer by a proceeding of this character. It has been held by this court, and at this day there is no question on the subject, that a private corporation may be proceeded against by garnishment. 9 Mo. R. 421, Angell & Ames on Corp. 333. But the city of St. Louis is a public municipal corporation, created for the public benefit, and not subject to the same rules governing private corporations, such as banks, insurance companies, and other similar corporations. It should not, therefore, be compelled to stand at the bar of all the courts in the State and...