Sanders v. St. Louis & New Orleans Anchor Line

• Decision Date: 04 February 1889
• Citation: 10 S.W. 595,97 Mo. 26
• Parties: Sanders et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. St. Louis & New Orleans Anchor Line
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

10 S.W. 595

97 Mo. 26

Sanders et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. St. Louis & New Orleans Anchor Line

Supreme Court of Missouri

February 4, 1889

Error to St. Louis City Circuit Court.

Reversed and remanded.

James P. Dawson and Dyer, Lee & Ellis for plaintiffs in error.

The state of Missouri has jurisdiction and the laws of the state have their operation over the whole Mississippi river, from bank to bank thereof, so far as the same forms a common boundary between said state and the state of Illinois. Swearingen v. Steamboat, 13 Mo. 519.

Given Campbell for defendant in error.

(1) The Illinois enabling act, April 18, 1818, gives "the middle of the Mississippi" as its western boundary. And article one, of the Illinois constitution of 1870, adopts the same line as her western boundary. Hence the territorial jurisdiction of the state of Illinois extends to the middle of the Mississippi river, or ad flium fluminis, and the territorial jurisdiction of the state of Missouri extends to the middle of the main channel of said river. (2) The concurrent claim to jnrisdiction as to steamboats has been abandoned by the courts of Missouri since the decisions in Taylor v. Trevor, 4 Wall. 411; Hine v. Trevor, 4 Wall. 555.

OPINION

Barclay, J.

The petition alleges that the minor son of one of plaintiffs was drowned, while in defendant's employ as a deck-hand on one of its steamboats, on the Mississippi river, between Illinois and Missouri, east of the main channel, while the boat was at the Illinois shore; that plaintiffs then were and now are citizens of this state, and defendant is a Missouri corporation with its chief office in St. Louis; that the boat was engaged in navigating the river as a carrier of freight and passengers and that the death complained of was caused by certain negligence on the part of defendant.

It is conceded that the petition is otherwise sufficient if the place of injury is governed by Missouri law.

The circuit court sustained a demurrer to the petition. Plaintiffs have brought the case here by writ of error.

The decisive question presented is whether our statute, giving damages for injuries resulting in death (R. S., chap. 25) controls a case between citizens of this state, arising from facts occurring on the Mississippi near the Illinois shore, east of the main channel. The act of Congress of April 18, 1818, for the admission of Illinois into the Union, defined its western boundary as "the middle of the Mississippi river," provided that the state should have concurrent jurisdiction thereon with any state or states to be formed west thereof so far as the river formed the common boundary. 3 U.S. Stat. at Large, 428. Afterwards the same intention was expressed with greater clearness in the act of 1820, authorizing the admission of Missouri. It defined the eastern boundary of the state as "down and following the course of the Mississippi river in the middle of the main channel thereof," provided that "said state shall have concurrent jurisdiction on the river Mississippi and every other river bordering on said state, so far as the said rivers shall form a common boundary to the said state and any other state or states now or hereafter to be formed and bounded by the same; such rivers to be common to both; and the river Mississippi and the navigable rivers and waters leading to the same shall be common highways and forever free," etc. 3 U.S. Stat. at Large, 546.

Missouri accepted the boundary thus defined and adopted the proviso as part of the first constitution. Const. 1820, art. 10, sec. 2. It has remained a part of our fundamental law to this day. Const. 1865, art 11, sec. 2; Const. 1875, art. 1, sec. 1.

The lawful extent of jurisdiction of different countries over the high seas, navigable waters and especially over inter-state rivers was a subject of serious differences among publicists and of historic conflicts of authority throughout the civilized world before the enactment of these acts of Congress relating to the Mississippi. The latter were intended, in part, to set at rest some of the...