State v. Missouri Pac. R. Co.

Citation147 S.W. 118
PartiesSTATE v. MISSOURI PAC. R. CO.
Decision Date07 May 1912
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Missouri

Robert T. Railey, for appellant. Lee B. Ewing and the Attorney General, for the State.

BROWN, J.

The defendant was tried in the circuit court of Vernon county on October 14, 1911, and convicted of violating section 1 of an act of the Forty-Sixth General Assembly entitled "An act requiring all corporations doing business in this state to pay their employés as often as semimonthly, and fixing penalties for violation thereof." Acts 1911, p. 150. By the judgment of the court, defendant was fined $10, from which it appeals.

The information, upon which the judgment below is based, charges that the defendant, a Missouri corporation, employed one Samuel Clark...

To continue reading

Request your trial
33 cases
  • Olson v. Idora Hill Mining Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • February 5, 1916
    ...... legitimate exercise of the police power of the state, and is. not an infringement upon the liberty of contract in respect. of labor, and does not ... . . In the. case of State v. Missouri P. Ry. Co., 242. Mo. 339, 147 S.W. 118, the court sustained the. constitutionality of a ......
  • Graff v. Priest
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • April 21, 1947
    ...... GEORGE GRAFF . v. . H. SAM PRIEST ET AL., Appellants. . No. 40171. . Supreme Court of Missouri. . Division One, April 21, 1947. . Rehearing Denied, May 12, 1947. . [201 S.W.2d 946] . ...   (1) The prohibition and/or regulation of intoxicants is a matter within the power of the state. Sec. 1, 2, Twenty-first Amendment, Fed. Constitution; Samuels v. McCurdy, 45 S. Ct. 264, 267 U.S. ...519; Zinn v. The City of Steelville, supra; Lincoln Center v. Linker, 6 Kan. App. 369, 51 Pac. 807; Ziffrin, Inc. v. Reeves, supra; California Liquor Control Act, Sec. 53.2; Indiana Liquor ......
  • State ex rel. Becker v. Wellston Sewer Dist., 31656.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • March 21, 1933
    ...Mo. 600. (6) Neither corporations nor citizens, or, it may be said, municipalities, have any vested right in statutes. State v. Railroad Co., 147 S.W. 118, 242 Mo. 339; Houck v. Little River Drainage Dist., Id.; McCrea v. Champlain, 35 N.Y. App. Div. 89, 55 N.Y. Supp. 125; 36 Cyc. 1170. (7)......
  • Kansas City v. Terminal Railway Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • February 21, 1930
    ...or the general well-being of the State." This section is merely declarative of a fundamental principle of government. [State v. Railroad, 242 Mo. 339, 147 S.W. 118.] The exercise of the police power cannot be limited, abridged or hampered in any manner, whether by statute, ordinance or cont......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Tipping point: Missouri single subject provision.
    • United States
    • Missouri Law Review Vol. 72 No. 4, September 2007
    • September 22, 2007
    ...Garvey v. Buckner, 272 S.W. 940 (Mo. 1925) (en bane); State v. Thomas, 256 S.W. 1028, 1030 (Mo. 1923). (15.) State v. Mo. Pac. Ry. Co., 147 S.W. 118, 126 (Mo. 1912); Sekyra, 282 S.W. at (16.) C.C. Dillon Co., 12 S.W.3d at 329 (Mo. 2000) (en banc) (citations omitted) (quoting Westin Crown Pl......

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