State v. Schieneman

• Court: Missouri Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: NORTON
• Citation: State v. Schieneman, 64 Mo. 386 (Mo. 1877)
• Decision Date: 30 April 1877
• Parties: STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff in Error, v. AUGUST SCHIENEMAN, Defendant in Error.

64 Mo. 386

STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiff in Error,

v.AUGUST SCHIENEMAN, Defendant in Error.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

April Term, 1877.

Error to Hannibal Court of Common Pleas.

J. L. Smith, Att'y Gen'l, with Carstarphen & Wilson, for Plaintiff in Error, cited: Wagn. Stat. 504, § 30; Vaughn vs. State, 4 Mo. 530; State vs. Ross, 25 Mo. 426; Com. vs. Welch, 1 Gray, 324-7; State vs. Coulter, 46 Mo. 564; State vs. Swadley, 15 Mo. 515.

Hatch & Hatch, for Defendant in Error, cited: State vs. Bankhead, 25 Mo. 558; State vs. Mitchell, 25 Mo. 420; State vs. Hopper, 27 Mo. 599; State vs. Edwards, 32 Mo. 549; State vs. Stubblefield, 32 Mo. 563; State vs. Jasper, 4 Dev. [N. C.] 323; Whart. Prec. [2 Ed.] § 861; Bell vs. Graham, 1 Nott & McC. [S. C.] 278.

NORTON, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

The defendant was indicted in the Hannibal court of common pleas for disturbing religious worship. On motion of defendant the indictment was quashed, and to review this action of the court the case is brought here by the State on a writ of error. The indictment alleges that “defendant at,” etc., “a congregation and assembly of people, then and there being met for religious worship, at the southeast corner of the public square in the city of Hannibal, then and there, unlawfully,” etc., “did disquiet and disturb the congregation and assembly of people then and there met for religious worship, by rude and indecent behavior, and by profane discourse, and by attempting to drive a horse fastened to a wagon, which said horse he was then and there driving, against, into and through the said congregation and assembly of people, met for religious worship, at and near the southeast corner of the public square and place of worship,” etc.

The section of the statute which creates the offense with which defendant is attempted to be charged is as follows: “Every person who shall wilfully,” etc., “disquiet or disturb any camp-meeting, congregation or other assembly of people met for religious worship, by making a noise or by rude and indecent behavior or profane discourse, within the place of worship, or so near to the same as to disturb the order or solemnity of the meeting, or menace, threaten or assault any person there being, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor,” etc.

We think that the evident purpose of the legislature was to protect from disturbance, first, camp-meetings, which are usually if not always held in the open air, and not within a building; and second,...