Quinette v. City of St. Louis
| Citation | 76 Mo. 402 |
| Parties | QUINETTE v. THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS, Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 31 October 1882 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Missouri |
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Appeals.
AFFIRMED.
Leverett Bell for appellant.
M. L. Gray for respondent.
This is an action on a number of claims assigned to the plaintiff to recover the compensation alleged to be due to the persons therein named, under an ordinance of the city of St. Louis, approved March 31st, 1871, for services as clerks at an election held in the city of St. Louis on the first Tuesday in April, 1877. The court of appeals affirmed the judgment of the circuit court, which was for the plaintiff.
It is contended for the city, that the ordinance under which compensation is claimed, is inconsistent with the city charter adopted October 21st, 1876, and was repealed by it. That portion of the ordinance, upon which plaintiff relies, is as follows: “At a general election, when there is a full ticket of all the city officers to be elected, the pay of each judge and clerk shall be $8; at a general election when only aldermen are to be elected $6; and at all special elections $4.” The sections of the charter which it is contended repeal the foregoing provision, are as follows: “The mayor, at least ten days before every election held in the city, shall appoint four competent persons to act as judges of election, not more than two of whom shall belong to the same political party, and two persons of different politics to act as clerks at each election district in the city.” * * “Provided, further, that every judge of election, serving as such at any general election held under this charter, shall be exempt from jury service for one year from the date of said general election; and, provided, further, that no judge of election shall receive any compensation for his services as such judge.” 2 R. S., p. 1578. Also section 1 of article 16 of said charter, as follows: “All ordinances in force at the time this charter and scheme go into operation, not inconsistent therewith, shall remain in full force until altered or repealed by the assembly, and all rights, actions, prosecutions and contracts of the city, not inconsistent therewith, shall continue to be valid as if this scheme had not been adopted. 2 R. S., p. 1625.
The ordinance provides that each judge and clerk shall receive compensation; the charter provides that the judges shall not receive compensation. The ordinance is inconsistent with the charter, only so far as the judges are...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of St. Louis v. Baskowitz
... ... ordinance attacked are valid and such provisions are ... severable from others claimed to be invalid, the whole ... enactment will not be declared void, but the valid portions ... will be sustained unless that would defeat the general ... purpose of the law. Quinette v. St. Louis, 76 Mo ... 402; Asphalt Co. v. Ullman, 137 Mo. 569; St ... Louis v. Liessing, 190 Mo. 489; Gist v. Construction ... Co., 224 Mo. 388; State ex rel. v. Clifford, ... 228 Mo. 194; State v. Cohen, 73 N.H. 543. (5) An ... ordinance passed in the exercise of legal ... ...
-
Ballentine v. Nester
...Mo. 395; State ex rel. Dunn v. Barlow, 48 Mo. 17; Craemer v. Clemens, 52 Mo. 133; City of Cape Girardeau v. Riley, 72 Mo. 220; Quinette v. St. Louis, 76 Mo. 402; St. Louis Gleason, 89 Mo. 67; State v. Butler, 178 Mo. 272; St. Louis v. Kaime, 180 Mo. 309; Construction Co. v. Hauessler, 201 M......
-
State Ex Inf. Jones v. Light And Development Company of St. Louis
...as required by the charter. Charter, Art. 3, Sec. 28; Lemoine v. St. Louis, 72 Mo. 404; St. Louis v. Sanguinet, 49 Mo. 581; Quinnette v. St. Louis, 76 Mo. 402; Construction Co. v. Hauessler, 201 Mo. 409. Ordinance 12723, insofar as it attempted to grant a franchise to individuals, was void,......
-
Gregory v. Kansas City
...the new charter by providing for a reinstatement of discharged employees, which provision is omitted from said new charter. [Quinette v. City of St. Louis, 76 Mo. 402.] It manifest that the old employees of the waterworks department correctly understood that provision of the new charter ado......