John Fischer v. City of St Louis

Decision Date16 May 1904
Docket NumberNo. 204,204
PartiesJOHN G. FISCHER, Plff. in Err. , v. CITY OF ST. LOUIS
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

This proceeding was originally instituted by a criminal complaint filed by the city of St. Louis against Fischer in the police court for a violation of an ordinance of the city in erecting, building, and establishing on certain premises occupied by Fischer, at Nos. 7208 and 7210 North Broadway, a dairy and cow stable, without first having obtained permission so to do from the municipal assembly by proper ordinance, and for maintaining such dairy and cow stable without permission of such assembly.

Motion was made to quash the complaint upon the ground, amongst others, that § 5 of the ordinance under which the conviction was held was in violation of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.

The case was submitted to the court upon the following agreed statement of the facts:

'The plaintiff, the city of St. Louis, is a municipal corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the state of Missouri, and defendant is and was on the 16th day of November, 1898, the occupant of certain premises known as 7208 and 7210 North Broadway, in the city of St. Louis, state of Missouri, upon which premises, at said time, stood a dwelling-house and frame stable, which had been erected and built prior to the occupancy of said premises by defendant.'

'At the time of the approval of ordinance No. 18,407, of said city and state, said premises, buildings, and stable were occupied and in use by a certain party other than this defendant, for the purpose of operating a dairy and maintaining a cow stable, and this defendant was, at the same time, operating a dairy and maintaining a cow stable on premises known as No. 6305 Bulwer avenue, in said city and state. Some time in the month of March, 1898, the said premises at Nos. 7208 and 7210 North Broadway were abandoned as a dairy and cow stable, and the dwelling-house thereon was occupied by a private family for residence purposes only, and no dairy or cow stable was maintained on said premises from March, 1898, until some time in September, 1898. In September, 1898, defendant moved his cows, about thirty in number, from premises No. 6305 Bulwer avenue, on to premises Nos. 7208 and 7210 North Broadway, placed them in the old stable, and did proceed to conduct upon said premises a dairy establishment, and produce from said cows milk, and sell the same to his customers for profit, and was so doing on the said 16th day of November, 1898, without having first obtained permission so to do from the municipal assembly by proper ordinance, as provided by § 5 of ordinance No. 18,407 of the city of St. Louis, approved April 6, 1896.' a copy of which section is given in the margin.

Upon this state of facts defendant was convicted and fined. An appeal was granted to the St. Louis court of criminal correction, which affirmed the judgment. An appeal was then taken to the supreme court of the state, where the judgment was again offirmed. 167 Mo. 654, 67 S. W. 872.

Messrs. Louis A. Steber and J. E. McKeighan for plaintiff in error.

Messrs. William F. Woerner, Charles W. Bates, and Charles R. Skinker for defendant in error.

[Argument of Counsel from Pages 367-369 intentionally omitted] Mr. Justice Brown delivered the opinion of the court:

The authority of the city of St. Louis to adopt the ordinance in question is found in the Revised Statutes of the state (1899, pp. 2484 and 2488), which declare: 'The mayor and assembly shall have power, within the city, by ordinance not inconsistent with the Constitution or any law of this state, or of this charter, . . . to . . . prohibit the erection of . . . cow stables and dairies . . . within prescribed limits, and to remove and regulate the same.'

'Finally, to pass all such ordinances, not inconsistent with the provisions of this charter or of the laws of the state, as may be expedient in maintaining the peace, good government, health, and welfare of the city, its trade, commerce, and manufactures, and to enforce the same by fines and penalties not exceeding $500, and by forfeitures not exceeding $1,000.

The authority of the municipality of St. Louis, under this Zcharter, to adopt the ordinance in question, was settled by the decision of the supreme court, and is not open to attack here.

Considerable stress is laid upon the fact that at the time the ordinance was adopted (April 6, 1896), the dairy and cow stable had already been erected, and at that time was occupied and in use for that purpose, though such use was subsequently abandoned, and the premises used as a private residence for a short time, when defendant moved his cattle there and established anew the dairy and cow stable which had theretofore been used. The supreme court, however, found that defendant was guilty of maintaining a dairy and cow stable, within the meaning of the ordinance, without permission of the municipal assembly, and as this construction of the ordinance involves no Federal question, we are relieved from the necessity of considering it.

Defendant's objection to the ordinance, that it is made to apply to the whole city, when authority was only given by the charter to prohibit the erection of cow stables and dairies 'within prescribed limits,' is equally without foundation. If it were possible to prescribe limits for the operation of the ordinance, it was held by the supreme court to be equally possible to declare that those limits should be coincident with the limits of the city. This is also a non-Federal question.

Defendant's main contention, however, is that, by vesting in the municipal assembly the power to permit the erection of dairy and cow stables to certain persons, a discrimination is thus declared in favor of such persons, and against all other persons, and the equal protection of the laws denied to all the disfavored class. The power of the legislature to authorize its municipalities to regulate and suppress all such places or occupations as, in its judgment, are likely to be injurious to the health of its inhabitants, or to disturb people living in the immediate neighborhood by loud noises or offensive odors, is so clearly...

To continue reading

Request your trial
165 cases
  • State v. Packer Corp.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Utah
    • April 7, 1931
    ...... . . The. Packer Corporation was convicted in the city court of Salt. Lake City of displaying a cigarette advertisement on a. ... degrees of evil and adapt its legislation accordingly (. St. Louis Consol. Coal Co. v. Illinois, 185 U.S. 203, 207, 22 S.Ct. 616, 46 L.Ed. ... cheese, and other dairy products; Fischer v. St. Louis , 194 U.S. 361, 367, 24 S.Ct. 673, 48 L.Ed. 1018,. ......
  • Phillips v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • May 25, 1931
    ...43, 48, 17 S. Ct. 731, 42 L. Ed. 71; Gundling v. Chicago, 177 U. S. 183, 187, 20 S. Ct. 633, 44 L. Ed. 725; Fischer v. St. Louis, 194 U. S. 361, 371, 24 S. Ct. 673, 48 L. Ed. 1018. 12 By November 1, 1930, 644 petitions for review under the Revenue Act of 1926 had been decided by the various......
  • Nebbia v. People of State of New York, 531
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • March 5, 1934
    ...S.Ct. 273, 76 L.Ed. 643, 79 A.L.R. 546. 19 Jackman v. Rosenbaum Co., 260 U.S. 22, 43 S.Ct. 9, 67 L.Ed. 107. 20 Fischer v. St. Louis, 194 U.S. 361, 24 S.Ct. 673, 48 L.Ed. 1018; Welch v. Swasey, 214 U.S. 91, 29 S.Ct. 567, 53 L.Ed. 923; Hadacheck v. Sebastian, 239 U.S. 394, 36 S.Ct. 143, 60 L.......
  • In re Opinion of the Justices
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • May 20, 1920
    ...local ordinances of this general nature have been declared valid by the Supreme Court of the United States. In Fischer v. St. Louis, 194 U. S. 361, 24 Sup. Ct. 673, 48 L. Ed. 1018, an ordinance of St. Louis prohibiting the erection or establishment of any cow stable within the city limits w......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT