State v. Cooper Cnty. Court

• Decision Date: 31 January 1853
• Citation: 17 Mo. 507
• Parties: STATE, AT THE RELATION OF CONNER, Plaintiff in Error, v. COOPER COUNTY COURT, Defendant in Error.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

17 Mo. 507

STATE, AT THE RELATION OF CONNER, Plaintiff in Error,

v.COOPER COUNTY COURT, Defendant in Error.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

January Term, 1853.

1. An order by a county court that a certain sum be paid to a party as a gratuity, is not a judicial, but an administrative act, and may be revoked at a subsequent term of the court.

Error to Cooper Circuit Court.

This was a proceeding on mandamus by Conner against the county court of Cooper county, in order to compel that body to issue to him a warrant on the county treasury, to which, as he alleged, he was entitled.

At the February term of the Cooper county court, in the year 1850, the following order was made: “Ordered by the court, that the sum of two hundred and fifty dollars be allowed James F. Connor, as extra for building a bridge across the Petite Saline creek, at Conner's mills; and that warrants be issued to said Conner for the same, as follows: one half at May term, 1850; one half at the May term, 1851.”

In pursuance of this order, a warrant was issued for the first instalment, and it was paid. At the November term, 1850, the county court entered the following order: “Ordered by the court, that so much of an order made and entered of record by the court, at the February term of said court, 1850, appropriating the sum of two hundred and fifty dollars as an extra allowance to James F. Conner, for building a bridge across the Petite Saline creek, at Conner's mills, as directs a warrant to be drawn in favor of said Conner, for the sum of one hundred and twenty-five dollars, at the May term of this court, 1851, be and the same is hereby repealed.” Conner, notwithstanding this last order, applied for a warrant under the first, which being refused, he applied to the Circuit Court for a conditional mandamus to the county court, requiring it to issue the warrant or to show cause to the contrary. To this writ, the county court made return, that no judgment was entered in favor of said Connor at the February term of said court, 1850, as is stated by said Conner in his petition for a mandamus; that, at that term of the court, an order was made that the sum of two hundred and fifty dollars be allowed said Conner, as “extra” for building a bridge across the Petite Saline creek, at said Conner's mills, in said county, and that warrants be issued in favor of said Conner, as was stated in said order; and that, prior to the time at which the second instalment became due and payable, the said order was repealed and revoked; that Conner, under a contract with the county, built the bridge referred to, and said work being done in pursuance to the contract, long before the making the said order, the contract price for building said bridge was fully paid and satisfied; that, at the time the said order of allowance was made, the county of Cooper was indebted to said Conner in no sum, and on no account whatever; but that the proceeding was an effort to make a voluntary donation, without any consideration, to the said Conner of the funds belonging to the said county; that said order of allowance was based alone on petitions from some of the inhabitants of the county, praying that an additional appropriation be made said Conner for building the bridge.

Upon the filing of this answer, a demurrer was entered to it, and upon a hearing, the answer was adjudged insufficient, and thereupon a peremptory mandamus was awarded. From this judgment, a writ of error was sued out, and the cause was brought to this court.

Hayden, for plaintiff in error. The county court has no jurisdiction except that which is expressly granted by the statute. Every one claiming the benefit of its orders or decrees is bound to show...