Southern Illinois & M. Bridge Co. v. Stone

Decision Date04 March 1903
Citation174 Mo. 1,73 S.W. 453
CourtMissouri Supreme Court
PartiesSOUTHERN ILLINOIS & M. BRIDGE CO. v. STONE et al.

2. Gen. St. 1865, c. 69, § 16, authorizes the formation of bridge companies to construct bridges over any of the streams of water wholly or partly within the state for "public use" for the crossing of persons or property, and requires that the articles of such corporation shall recite "the purposes for which the bridge is to be used, whether for railroads or ordinary travel, or both." Rev. St. 1879, § 953, amended such section by substituting, for that part of the section which required the stating of the purposes of the bridge in the articles of incorporation, the requirement that the articles should be "according to the provisions of this article," which by section 929 thereof authorized the organization of corporations for the purpose of "constructing toll bridges." Held, that the amendment did not deny the right of incorporation of a company to construct a railroad toll bridge, but, instead, enlarged the power by permitting incorporation for the construction of toll bridges in general.

3. Gen. St. 1865, c. 69, § 17, authorizing bridge corporations to exercise the right of eminent domain, was amended by Laws 1871-72, p. 15, by inserting after the words "necessary to appropriate any lands of private persons or corporations," in the former act, the words "for approaches, road, foot, or wagon ways of said bridge company." Held, that the word "road," in such amendment, when applied to a structure designed for the passage of railroad trains, should be construed to mean "railroad," and authorized a railroad bridge company to condemn land for its approaches and necessary tracks to its bridge.

4. The courts of Missouri will not take judicial notice of the legislative acts or statutes of another state not introduced in evidence at the trial.

5. Rev. St. 1899, § 1024, authorizes a foreign corporation to transact business in Missouri on filing its articles of incorporation with the secretary of state, as required by section 1025, on obtaining a certificate from such secretary of state, and declares that such corporation shall be subject to all the liabilities, restrictions, and duties which are or may be imposed on corporations of like character, organized under the general laws of the state, "and shall have no other or greater powers." Held that, domestic bridge corporations being authorized to condemn land necessary for their purposes, where a foreign corporation was chartered to build a bridge across the Mississippi river between the states of Illinois and Missouri, and was authorized by act of congress to construct such bridge, such corporation, when properly authorized to do business in Missouri, was authorized to exercise the same right by section 1024, without regard to whether it was entitled to exercise such right in the state of its residence.

Valliant and Brace, JJ., dissenting.

In Banc. Appeal from Circuit Court, Dunklin County; J. L. Fort, Judge.

Application by the Southern Illinois & Missouri Bridge Company for the condemnation of land, to which R. G. Stone and others filed objections. From a judgment sustaining the objections, plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the circuit court of Dunklin county dismissing the petition of the plaintiff, in which it prayed for the appointment of commissioners to assess the damages which would be sustained by its appropriation of certain land lying on the west bank of the Mississippi river, in Scott county, in this state, for approaches, roadway, and terminal yards. The amount of land which it sought to condemn for its use as a bridge company was about 20 acres, a strip 200 feet wide and about 4,500 feet long, and extending west from the bank of the river. The defendants were the record owners when the petition was filed. The application in the first instance was made to Judge Riley, the regular judge of the Scott circuit. An affidavit of prejudice was filed aganist him, and he thereupon granted a change of venue to Judge Fort's circuit, and sent the case to Dunklin county.

The petition is as follows:

"In the Circuit Court of Scott County, Missouri, to October Term, 1902. Southern Illinois & Missouri Bridge Company, Plaintiff, v. Robert Stone, R. M. Finley, Nannie E. Finley, David Heldt, Burhardt Miller, and Perry Bates, Defendants. Plaintiff for its cause of action says: It is a corporation regularly incorporated under the laws of the state of Illinois, and has obtained from the secretary of state of the state of Missouri authority to do business in the state of Missouri. That it is incorporated for the purpose of erecting and maintaining a bridge across the Mississippi river from a point near Thebes, in Alexander county, Illinois, to a point near Manning's Landing, in Scott county, Missouri, with the necessary appurtenances thereto. That said bridge is intended as a railway bridge, and it is necessary for this plaintiff to have a right of way for its railway tracks, bridge, and terminal yards, etc. That the general direction of its yards will be westwardly from the western bank of the Mississippi river. That for the purpose of carrying out its charter privileges it is necessary for it to hold and to own the following described tract of land, lying and being in the county of Scott, state of Missouri, to wit: A part of the S. E. and S. W. parts of private survey No. 794 in tp. 30, range 14 east, and in lot 2 of the N. E. qr. of sec. 2, tp. 29, range 14 east, being a tract of land 200 ft. wide, 100 ft. on each side of the center line of the approaches to the Southern Missouri & Illinois Bridge Co., as located and platted, beginning at a point on the east line of fractional sec. 24, tp. 30, It 14 east, and 1,240 ft. from the S. E. cor. of said frac. sec.; thence run south, 70 degrees 45 minutes east, 765 feet; thence by a one degree curve to the right 980.4 ft; thence south, 59 degrees 45 minutes east, 924.8 ft.; thence by a 2 deg. 30 min. curve to the left 1,289.3 ft.; thence N., 87 deg. 51 min. east, to the west bank of the Mississippi river. Said center line intersects the north line of tp. 29 100½ ft. west of the N. W. cor. of lot 2 in the N. E. qr. of sec. 2, tp. 29, R. 14 east, and also intersects the west line of said lot 2 69.1 ft. south of the N. W. cor. of said lot 2. The tract above described contains 20.3 acres, and will appear by a blue print hereto attached and made a part of this petition. That the defendants herein, together with R. M. Finley, the husband of one of the defendants, are the owners of said real estate. That defendants Heldt, Miller, and Bates are tenants, having growing crops on different portions of said real estate. That the defendants have refused to relinquish the plaintiff the right to the occupancy and use of said real estate for the purposes designated. That your petitioner has endeavored to agree with defendants and each of them upon the price to pay for said property, but has been unable to amicably settle or to agree at all upon a proper compensation to either of the parties defendant. That said real estate is necessary for the laying of tracks and the handling of business over and across plaintiff's bridge. Wherefore your petitioner prays the court to make such order and decree that may be proper and necessary, and to appoint three freeholders of the county of Scott and state of Missouri as commissioners to assess the damages which defendants may sustain in consequence of the establishment, erection, and maintenance of said road and approaches over and through the said premises, and for all proper orders."

Summons regularly issued and was served on defendants. When the cause reached Dunklin county, the defendants filed the following pleading which they denominate an "answer" in the caption, and a "motion" in the body:

"In the Circuit Court of Dunklin County, Missouri. Southern Illinois & Missouri Bridge Company, Plaintiff, v. R. G. Stone, R. M. Finley et al., Defendants. Answer. Defendants in the above-entitled cause, Robert G. Stone, R. M. Finley, and Nannie Finley, limit their appearance herein for the sole and only purpose of this motion, and make the following suggestions and objections against the appointment of commissioners as prayed for in plaintiff's pretended petition:

"First. No summons or notice has ever been issued and served upon these defendants in the manner required by law. The pretended summons or notice purports to have been issued by the clerk of the court, and it does not appear that prior thereto the said court or the judge thereof had ordered plaintiff's petition to be filed, nor that the court or the judge thereof ordered any summons or notice issued upon said pretended petition. It appears upon the face of said pretended petition and of said pretended notice or summons that said petition was never ordered filed and said pretended notice or summons never ordered issued by the court or judge, and that said pretended petition was received and said pretended notice made out without authority from the court and contrary to law.

"Second. It appears from the face of the plaintiff's pretended petition that the plaintiff is a corporation incorporated under the laws of the state of Illinois for the purpose of constructing and maintaining and operating a bridge across the Mississippi river, and these defendants say such a corporation, incorporated under the laws of another state, for such a purpose, has no right, power, or authority, under the Constitution and laws of Missouri, to condemn property of any kind situated in the state of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
62 cases
  • State v. Shell Pipe Line Corp., 36517.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • 4 Mayo 1940
    ...Va. 492, 183 S.E. 246; 105 A.L.R. Ann. 16. (6) Appellant has exercised the power of eminent domain. So. Ill. & Mo. Bridge Co. v. Stone, 73 S.W. 453, 174 Mo. 32. (7) Disregarding corporate entity. Humble Oil & Refining Co. v. Railroad Comm., 128 S.W. (2d) 12; State v. Lone Star Gas Co., 86 S......
  • In re Kansas City Ordinance No.39946
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • 28 Abril 1923
    ...under which it is authorized is for the legislative body and not a subject of judicial inquiry. So. III. & Mo. Bridge Co. v. Stone, 174 Mo. 1, 73 S. W. 453, 63 L. R. A. 301; Aldridge v. Spears, 101 Mo. 400, 14 S. W. 118. In the case of a municipal ordinance proposing to take property for pu......
  • State ex rel. Kansas City v. State Highway Commission
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • 13 Junio 1942
    ...v. Stewart, 282 Mo. 108, 221 S.W. 31; Grove Bridge Co. v. State, 133 Okla. 115; Bridges, 11 C. J. S. 985, sec. 3; Southern I. & M. Bridge Co. v. Stone, 174 Mo. 1, 73 S.W. 453; R. 1939, sec. 8537. The Legislature has interpreted the word "bridge," as contained in the laws of Missouri, 1923, ......
  • Riggs v. Springfield., 35299.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • 4 Abril 1939
    ......Tremayne v. St. Louis, 320 Mo. 120; Bridge Co. v. Stone, 174 Mo. 1, 63 L.R.A. 301; Kansas City v. Liebi, 298 Mo. 569; ... treatment was built in the United States in 1894 at Urbana, Illinois. The first installation of an Imhoff tank in the United States was at ......
  • 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