Latinette v. City of St. Louis

• Decision Date: 21 November 1912
• Docket Number: 1,882.
• Parties: LATINETTE v. CITY OF ST. LOUIS.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit

201 F. 676

LATINETTE v. CITY OF ST. LOUIS.

No. 1,882.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

November 21, 1912

P. W Haberman and G. L. Stern, both of St. Louis, Mo., Daniel Hogan, Jr., of Danville, Ill., and Henry L. Stern, of Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff in error.

Lambert E. Walther and Maurice V. Joyce, both of E. St. Louis, Ill for defendant in error.

Before BAKER, SEAMAN, and KOHLSAAT, Circuit Judges.

BAKER Circuit Judge.

By the judgment to which this writ of error is addressed, St. Louis a municipal corporation of Missouri, acquired by condemnation for the eastern approach to a bridge across the Mississippi certain of Latinette's lands situate in Illinois.

Questions of law arising from the admitted facts, stated in the city's petition, concern, first, the jurisdiction of the United States Circuit Court for the Eastern District of Illinois, and, second, the right of the Missouri municipality to appropriate lands in Illinois.

In the petition proper averments were made respecting the organization and existence of the city as a corporation under the laws of Missouri and the citizenship of Latinette in Illinois and his residency in the Eastern District. Besides jurisdiction by reason of diversity of citizenship it will appear in the consideration of the merits that the decision depends wholly upon a question of right under the Constitution and laws of the United States.

It is conceded that St. Louis was not authorized by the laws of Illinois to maintain this condemnation proceeding. A federal grant of authority is alone counted upon in the petition. That Missouri by her statutes and decisions (Haeussler v St. Louis, 205 Mo. 656, 103 S.W. 1034) had authorized St. Louis to build and maintain the bridge in question, together with the necessary approaches, and for that purpose to buy or appropriate lands in Missouri, to buy lands in Illinois, and to accept a federal grant of right to appropriate lands in Illinois, seems to be settled beyond controversy. There remain an examination of the alleged federal grant, and an inquiry into the power of the federal government to make a grant of that character.

By the general bridge act (Act March 23, 1906, c. 1130, 34 Stat. 84 (U.S. Comp. St. Supp. 1907, p. 1058)) Congress provided that 'when, hereafter, authority is granted by Congress to any persons to construct and maintain a bridge across or over any of the navigable waters of the United States,' the bridge should not be built except in accordance with plans and specifications approved by the Secretary of War and the chief of engineers; that the bridge when built should be recognized as a post route; that the United States should have the right to construct and maintain, without charge, telegraph and telephone lines upon the bridge and its approaches; and that equal privileges in the use of the bridge and its approaches should be granted by the owner to all railroad, telegraph, and telephone companies.

Congress on June 25, 1906 (34 Stat.at L.p. 461, c. 3539), enacted:

'Section 1. That the city of St. Louis, a corporation organized under the laws of the state of Missouri, be, and is hereby, authorized to construct, maintain, and operate a railroad, wagon, and foot-passenger bridge, and approaches thereto, across the Mississippi river at St. Louis, Missouri, in accordance with the provisions of the act entitled 'An act to regulate the construction of bridges over navigable waters,' approved March 23, 1906.

'Sec. 2. That for the purpose of carrying into effect the objects of this act, the city of St. Louis may receive, purchase, and also acquire by lawful appropriation and condemnation in the states of Illinois and Missouri, upon making proper compensation, to be ascertained according to the laws of the state within which the same is located, real and personal property and rights of property,

...