State v. Miller

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Missouri
Writing for the CourtWAGNER
Citation45 Mo. 495
Decision Date31 March 1870
PartiesTHE STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent, v. WILLIAM H. MILLER, Appellant.

45 Mo. 495

THE STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent,
v.
WILLIAM H. MILLER, Appellant.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

March Term, 1870.


[45 Mo. 496]

Appeal from St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction.

Hart & Peacock, for appellant.

The indictment is framed under a section of a law which is unconstitutional and void, because, 1st, it treats of two subject-matters; 2d, the particular subject-matter treated in it is not mentioned in its title; 3d, nor is such subject-matter germain to that mentioned in the title of the act, which treats of transfers to bailees, and not sales to vendees. (Const. Mo., art. 4, § 32; State ex rel. Hixon v. Schofield et al., 41 Mo. 39.) The act relates to a class of offenses of a kindred character, all relating to trusts in matters of trade and commerce. These trusts may differ in species, but in their general nature they harmonize and agree.


WAGNER, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

At the November term, 1868, of the St. Louis Criminal Court, the appellant was indicted upon the charge of violating the provisions of the thirteenth section of “an act to prevent the issue of false receipts or bills of lading, and to punish fraudulent transfers of property by warehousemen, wharfingers, and others.” The section alluded to is as follows: “Whosoever shall purchase any goods, wares, and merchandise, or other commodity, for cash, and shall sell, hypothecate, or pledge the same to another, and use the proceeds thereof for any purpose other than the payment of the seller or vendor, with intent to cheat or defraud such seller or vendor, or who shall conceal, ship, or otherwise make way with, or deliver to another, any goods, wares, merchandise, or other commodities so purchased, without paying for the same, with the intent to cheat or defraud the seller or vendor thereof, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding five

[45 Mo. 497]

thousand dollars, or by imprisonment in the penitentiary for a term not exceeding five years, or by both such fine and imprisonment.” (Acts 1868, p. 13, § 13; 1 Wagn. Stat. 221, § 12.)

There were four counts in the indictment. The first count charged that on the 8th day of August, 1868, the appellant purchased one thousand sacks of corn, of the value of $2,500, of John M. Gilkeson and James L. Sloss, for cash, and, with intent to cheat and defraud said Gilkeson and Sloss, unlawfully and feloniously sold the same and used the proceeds thereof for a purpose other than the payment of the sellers and vendors. The second count charged that he hypothecated the corn so purchased, and used the proceeds thereof for a purpose other than the payment of the sellers and vendors. The third count charged that he delivered said corn to another without paying for the same, and the fourth count charged that he shipped the same without paying therefor. There being no evidence to support the fourth count, it was withdrawn; and after hearing the evidence the jury returned a verdict against the defendant of guilty of felony, as charged in the first, second, and third counts of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
33 practice notes
  • State ex rel. Transport Mfg. Co. v. Bates, No. 41456.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • November 14, 1949
    ...Sec. 32, Art. IV, Constitution of 1865; Sec. 28, Art. IV, Constitution of 1875; Sec. 23, Art. III, Constitution of 1945; State v. Miller, 45 Mo. 495; Thomas v. Buchanan County, 330 Mo. 627, 51 S.W. (2d) 95; State ex rel. Garvey v. Buckner, 308 Mo. 390, 272 S.W. 940; Graves v. Purcell, 337 M......
  • State v. Vandiver
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • May 22, 1909
    ...relates to the subject therein stated, then the act is single, and does not offend against said constitutional provision. State v. Miller, 45 Mo. 495; Ewing v. Hoblitzelle, 85 Mo. 64; State ex rel. v. Miller, 100 Mo. 439, 13 S. W. 677; Town of Kirkwood v. Heege, 135 Mo. 112, 36 S. W. 614; E......
  • City of St. Louis v. Senter Comm. Co., No. 32895.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • June 5, 1935
    ...mentioned in the title. City Charter, Art. IV, Sec. 13; Mo. Const., Art. IV, Sec. 28; St. Louis v. Weitzel, 130 Mo. 615; State v. Miller, 45 Mo. 495; O'Leary v. Cook County, 28 Ill. 534; State v. Tallo, 308 Mo. 594; Baird v. Rice, 63 Pa. St. 500; St. Louis v. Breuer, 223 S.W. 111; Star Squa......
  • Sherrill v. Brantley, No. 30783.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • December 22, 1933
    ...subject containing different features but all pertaining to the same legislative purpose. Ferguson v. Gentry, 206 Mo. 918; State v. Miller, 45 Mo. 495; State ex rel. v. Mead, 71 Mo. 266. (6) The proper construction of Section 16 of the Small Loan Act is that it does not undertake to change ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
33 cases
  • State ex rel. Transport Mfg. Co. v. Bates, No. 41456.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • November 14, 1949
    ...Sec. 32, Art. IV, Constitution of 1865; Sec. 28, Art. IV, Constitution of 1875; Sec. 23, Art. III, Constitution of 1945; State v. Miller, 45 Mo. 495; Thomas v. Buchanan County, 330 Mo. 627, 51 S.W. (2d) 95; State ex rel. Garvey v. Buckner, 308 Mo. 390, 272 S.W. 940; Graves v. Purcell, 337 M......
  • State v. Vandiver
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • May 22, 1909
    ...relates to the subject therein stated, then the act is single, and does not offend against said constitutional provision. State v. Miller, 45 Mo. 495; Ewing v. Hoblitzelle, 85 Mo. 64; State ex rel. v. Miller, 100 Mo. 439, 13 S. W. 677; Town of Kirkwood v. Heege, 135 Mo. 112, 36 S. W. 614; E......
  • City of St. Louis v. Senter Comm. Co., No. 32895.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • June 5, 1935
    ...mentioned in the title. City Charter, Art. IV, Sec. 13; Mo. Const., Art. IV, Sec. 28; St. Louis v. Weitzel, 130 Mo. 615; State v. Miller, 45 Mo. 495; O'Leary v. Cook County, 28 Ill. 534; State v. Tallo, 308 Mo. 594; Baird v. Rice, 63 Pa. St. 500; St. Louis v. Breuer, 223 S.W. 111; Star Squa......
  • Sherrill v. Brantley, No. 30783.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • December 22, 1933
    ...subject containing different features but all pertaining to the same legislative purpose. Ferguson v. Gentry, 206 Mo. 918; State v. Miller, 45 Mo. 495; State ex rel. v. Mead, 71 Mo. 266. (6) The proper construction of Section 16 of the Small Loan Act is that it does not undertake to change ......
  • 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