State ex rel. Hart v. City of St. Louis

• Decision Date: 31 July 1947
• Docket Number: 40392
• Citation: 204 S.W.2d 234,356 Mo. 820
• Parties: State of Missouri ex rel. W. T. O. Hart, Anton Sestric, Joseph P. Collins, James H. Deneefe, G. J. Dixon, Thomas Gabbert, George W. Johnson, J. Glennon McKenna and Eben P. Wroughton, as Judges of the Magistrate Court of the City of St. Louis, Relators, v. The City of St. Louis, Aloys P. Kaufmann as Mayor, Louis Nolte as Comptroller, Charles E. Albanese as President of the Board of Aldermen, and Orville A. Armstrong, Louis G. Berra, William C. Brady, Jasper C. Caston, Edgar J. Feely, Frank Flottmann, Carl W. Guetschow, Fred W. Haag, Alfred I. Harris, John W. Hoerr, Charles G. Kratovil, Louis A. Lange, Ray F. Lohse, Walter Lowe, Charles P. McBride, Floyd L. McKinney, Richard Nichols, Anton Niemeyer, Harman H. Novack, Charles B. O'Connor, Linton W. Peterson, Sidney R. Redmond, Vernon Riehl, Joseph R. Slay, Harry A. Stoffer, J. Ray Weinbrenner and Walter W. Ziegenbalg as the remaining Members of the Board of Aldermen of the City of St. Louis
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

204 S.W.2d 234

356 Mo. 820

State of Missouri ex rel. W. T. O. Hart, Anton Sestric, Joseph P. Collins, James H. Deneefe, G. J. Dixon, Thomas Gabbert, George W. Johnson, J. Glennon McKenna and Eben P. Wroughton, as Judges of the Magistrate Court of the City of St. Louis, Relators, v. The City of St. Louis, Aloys P. Kaufmann as Mayor, Louis Nolte as Comptroller, Charles E. Albanese as President of the Board of Aldermen, and Orville A. Armstrong, Louis G. Berra, William C. Brady, Jasper C. Caston, Edgar J. Feely, Frank Flottmann, Carl W. Guetschow, Fred W. Haag, Alfred I. Harris, John W. Hoerr, Charles G. Kratovil, Louis A. Lange, Ray F. Lohse, Walter Lowe, Charles P. McBride, Floyd L. McKinney, Richard Nichols, Anton Niemeyer, Harman H. Novack, Charles B. O'Connor, Linton W. Peterson, Sidney R. Redmond, Vernon Riehl, Joseph R. Slay, Harry A. Stoffer, J. Ray Weinbrenner and Walter W. Ziegenbalg as the remaining Members of the Board of Aldermen of the City of St. Louis

No. 40392

Supreme Court of Missouri

July 31, 1947

Original Proceeding in Mandamus.

WRIT QUASHED.

Alroy S. Phillips for relators.

(1) This court has original jurisdiction in mandamus. Constitution of 1945, Secs. 3, 5, Art. V; Constitution of 1875, Sec. 3, Art. VI. (2) Relators have the right to sue in mandamus. Relators are a court of record of the state charged with the duty of administering justice. Constitution of 1945 Secs. 1, 18, 19, Art. V; Constitution of 1945, Sec. 14, Art I; 1945 Senate Bill No. 207, sec. 19; 1945 Senate Bill No 239, sec. 1. (3) At common law, as a court relators have the inherent power to provide themselves with clerks and other necessary instrumentalities. 21 C.J.S., pp. 28, 214; State ex rel. Gentry v. Becker, 351 Mo. 769, 174 S.W.2d 181. (4) Mandamus lies on behalf of relators to compel other public officers to obey laws ancillary to their duty to administer justice. State ex rel. Zoological Board v. St. Louis, 318 Mo. 910, 1 S.W.2d 1021; State ex rel. Beach v. Beach, 325 Mo. 175, 28 S.W.2d 105; State ex rel. Wolfe v. Bronson, 115 Mo. 271, 21 S.W. 1125; State ex rel. Hawes v. Mason, 153 Mo. 23, 54 S.W. 524; State ex rel. McCaffery v. Mason, 155 Mo. 486, 55 S.W. 636; State ex rel. Gentry v. Becker, 351 Mo. 769, 174 S.W.2d 181; State ex rel. McNeil v. St. Louis County Court, 42 Mo. 496. (5) The proper construction of the proviso in Section 21 of Senate Bill No. 207 is that it confers authority on the county courts to provide, at the expense of the county, such additional clerks and other employees as may be needed by the magistrates who are not "additional magistrates" ordered by the circuit court. Constitution of 1945, Sec. 18, Art. V; 1945 Senate Bill No. 207, Secs. 1, 17, 21, 22, 23, 23a; 1945 Senate Bill No. 251, sec. 2102; Castilo v. State Highway Comm., 312 Mo. 244, 279 S.W. 673. (6) There is no conflict between Senate Bills 207 and 239 as to additional clerks and employees. 1945 Senate Bill No. 207, sec. 21; 1945 Senate Bill No. 239, secs. 2 and 5; St. Louis v. Klausmeier, 213 Mo. 119, 112 S.W. 516. (7) Senate Bill 239 is applicable to the City of St. Louis because it is a city in a county of the same name. Prior to the Constitution of 1875 the legislature chartered all cities and fixed and changed all county boundaries. Kansas City v. J.I. Case Threshing Mach. Co., 337 Mo. 913, 87 S.W.2d 195; Opinion of Supreme Court Judges, 55 Mo. 295; Pool v. Brown, 98 Mo. 675, 11 S.W. 743. (8) The Constitution of 1875 took away the legislature's power to change county boundaries, authorized the consolidation of city and county governments, and authorized the City of St. Louis and other large cities to adopt charters for city government. Constitution of 1875, Secs. 3, 4, 15, 16-25, Art. IX; Scheme of Separation, Secs. 1, 2, R.S. 1939, p. 3975; Charter of St. Louis, R.S. 1879, pp. 1572-1627; Charter of St. Louis, adopted June 30, 1914. (9) By judicial decisions and the Constitution of 1945 the charter of the City of St. Louis has been stripped of all purely county matters and the city is now a city in a county of the same name, and Senate Bill 239 is applicable thereto. 1945 Senate Bill No. 239, secs. 1, 5, 6, 7 and 10; Constitution of 1945, Sec. 31, Art. VI; Constitution of 1945, Sec. 17, Art. VI; Sec. 655, R.S. 1939, clause nineteenth; Lovins v. St. Louis, 336 Mo. 1194, 84 S.W.2d 127; State ex rel. Harvey v. Sheehan, 269 Mo. 421, 190 S.W. 864; State ex rel. Carpenter v. St. Louis, 318 Mo. 870, 2 S.W.2d 713; State ex inf. McKittrick v. Dwyer, 343 Mo. 973, 124 S.W.2d 1173; State ex inf. Barker v. Koeln, 270 Mo. 174, 192 S.W. 748; Kansas City v. J.I. Case Threshing Mach. Co., 337 Mo. 913, 87 S.W.2d 195. (10) The board of aldermen is the county court of the County of the City of St. Louis. 1945 Senate Bill No. 207, sec. 21; Scheme of Separation, Sec. 24, R.S. 1939, p. 3981; R.S. 1939, secs. 15744-45; Charter of St. Louis, Sec. 1, Art. III; R.S. 1879, p. 1582; Charter of St. Louis of 1914, Sec. 1, Art. IV; State ex rel. Lefman v. Schuler, 317 Mo. 671, 296 S.W. 808; State ex rel. Dwyer v. Nolte, 351 Mo. 271, 172 S.W.2d 854. (11) The additional clerks and employees provided by Ordinance No. 43,940 are necessary for relators properly to conduct their court. St. Louis Ordinance No. 43,940; 1945 Senate Bill No. 207, sec. 21. (12) Ordinance No. 43,940 does not require the recommendation of respondent Board of Estimate and Apportionment. The Board of Estimate and Apportionment is not mentioned in the Constitution or statutes and no power is conferred on it thereby. 1945 Senate Bill No. 207, sec. 21; St. Louis Charter of 1914, Sec. 25, Art. IV; St. Louis Ordinance No. 43,940; State ex rel. Mulvoy v. Miller, 315 Mo. 41, 285 S.W. 504; Scheme of Separation, Sec. 24, R.S. 1939, p. 3981; Secs. 15,744-45, R.S. 1939. (13) The board of aldermen as a county court is a mere ministerial body, and the delegation to it of authority to provide additional clerks and employees is the delegation of an administrative power and not an unauthorized delegation of legislative power. Constitution of 1945, Sec. 7, Art. VI; Constitution of 1875, Sec. 36, Art. VI; Lusk v. Atkinson, 268 Mo. 109, 186 S.W. 703; Mo. Southern R. v. Pub. Serv. Comm., 279 Mo. 484, 214 S.W. 379; State ex rel. Jenkins v. Brown, 323 Mo. 382, 19 S.W.2d 484; State ex rel. Laundry v. Pub. Serv. Comm., 327 Mo. 93, 34 S.W.2d 43; State ex rel. Consumers Pub. Serv. Co. v. Pub. Serv. Comm., 352 Mo. 905, 180 S.W.2d 40; State ex rel. Rhodes v. Pub. Serv. Comm., 270 Mo. 547, 194 S.W. 287; Marsh v. Bartlett, 343 Mo. 526, 121 S.W.2d 737; Field v. Clark, 143 U.S. 649, 12 S.Ct. 495; United States v. Grimaud, 220 U.S. 506, 31 S.Ct. 480. (14) The General Assembly had power to provide additional clerks and employees at the expense of the county. The administration of justice is a state governmental function of the highest order and relator's court is part of the judicial system of the state. Constitution of 1945, Secs. 2, 14, Art. I; Constitution of 1945, Art. II; Constitution of 1945, Secs. 1, 18-21, Art. V; 1945 Senate Bills Nos. 207 and 239. (15) The taxing power belongs to the state, and the city derives its tax power from its charter and by statutes. Constitution of 1945, Secs. 1, 11, Art. X; St. Louis v. Sternberg, 69 Mo. 289; 1945 House Committee Substitute for House Bill No. 606. (16) Taxes collected by cities and counties can be appropriated by the general assembly for the expenses of state courts. State ex rel. Aull v. Field, 119 Mo. 593, 24 S.W. 742; Kansas City v. J.I. Case Threshing Mach. Co., 337 Mo. 913, 87 S.W.2d 195; State ex rel. Lynn v. Board of Education, 141 Mo. 45, 41 S.W. 924; State ex rel. Faxon v. Owsley, 122 Mo. 68, 26 S.W. 659; State ex rel. Hawes v. Mason, 153 Mo. 23, 54 S.W. 524; State ex rel. McCaffery v. Mason, 155 Mo. 486, 55 S.W. 536; State ex rel. Zoological Board v. St. Louis, 318 Mo. 910, 1 S.W.2d 1021; State ex rel. Carpenter v. St. Louis, 318 Mo. 870, 2 S.W.2d 713; State ex rel. Dwyer v. Nolte, 351 Mo. 271, 172 S.W.2d 854. (17) Section 21 of Senate Bill 207 is an appropriation of the city's tax money by the state and no appropriation bill for money therefor by respondent aldermen is necessary or proper. 1945 Senate Bill No. 207, sec. 21; State ex rel. Hawes v. Mason, 153 Mo. 23, 54 S.W. 524; State ex rel. Dwyer v. Nolte, 351 Mo. 271, 172 S.W.2d 854. (18) It is the duty of respondent Comptroller to audit and draw his warrants for the salaries of the clerks and employees appointed by relators under Ordinance No. 43,940, and of respondent city to pay them, and mandamus lies to compel them to perform such duties. 1945 Senate Bill No. 207, sec. 21; St. Louis Ordinance No. 43,940; 1945 Senate Bill No. 251, sec. 2102; 1914 St. Louis Charter, Sec. 2, Art. XIV; State ex rel. Hawes v. Mason, 153 Mo. 23, 54 S.W. 524; State ex rel. Zoological Board v. St. Louis, 318 Mo. 910, 1 S.W.2d 1021; State ex rel. Carpenter v. St. Louis, 318 Mo. 870, 2 S.W.2d 713; State ex rel. Beach v. Beach, 325 Mo. 175, 28 S.W.2d 105

George L. Stemmler, City Counselor, and Thos. J. Neenan, Associate City Counselor, for respondents.

(1) Adequate provision has been made by statute to provide relators with clerks and other necessary instrumentalities. Therefore the inherent power of the court must yield to those statutes. 21 C.J.S. 28. (2) Mandamus will not lie against the officer of a legislative body when such officer is acting in his legislative capacity and performing his legislative function and duty. It would be a usurpation of the power of the court to assume jurisdiction of government which belongs exclusively to the law-making body. State ex rel. v Bolte, 151 Mo. 362; Albright v. Fisher, 164 Mo. 56. (3) In order to determine the proper meaning of the proviso in Section 21 of Senate Bill 207, all the provisions of the Constitution and statutes...