State v. Shannon
Court | United States State Supreme Court of Missouri |
Citation | 133 Mo. 139,33 S.W. 1137 |
Parties | STATE ex rel. CAMERON v. SHANNON, Comptroller. |
Decision Date | 04 February 1896 |
2. Kansas City Charter, art. 13, authorizes the board of public works to appoint a superintendent of waterworks, with the approval of the mayor and upper house, and the superintendent is thereby required, before taking office, to give a bond, to be approved by the city comptroller. Held that, after issuance by the board of a certificate of appointment of the superintendent, the comptroller cannot, in mandamus proceedings to compel the approval of the bond, justify his refusal on the ground that the consent of the mayor was not given.
3. In mandamus proceedings to compel the approval by the comptroller of an official bond, the comptroller cannot invoke a rule of his office, adopted without authority, requiring the approval by the city counselor of the form of official bonds.
Original proceeding by mandamus on the relation of W. L. Cameron against John H. Shannon, comptroller of Kansas City. Peremptory writ awarded.
Karnes, Holmes & Krauthoff, Frank H. Dexter, and C. O. Tichenor, for relator. H. C. McDougal, C. S. Palmer, and F. F. Rozzelle, for respondent.
This is an original proceeding by mandamus to compel the comptroller of Kansas City to approve the bond of relator, who claims to have been duly appointed to the office of superintendent of waterworks of said city, in pursuance of its charter and ordinances, and by and with the consent of its mayor. The petition avers that the relator, "William L. Cameron, is now a resident of Kansas City, Jackson county, Missouri, where he has lived for several years last past, and that John F. Shannon, respondent herein, is the duly appointed and qualified comptroller of said city, and that said Kansas City is a municipal corporation, duly created and organized, under and by virtue of the provisions of section 16, art. 9, of the constitution of Missouri, and by virtue of the charter adopted by the qualified voters of said city, at a special election held April 8, 1889." By the provisions of section 1, art. 1, and section 1, art. 3, and by the terms of article 13 of said charter, the said city is authorized to operate and maintain a system of waterworks in said city, and by the provisions of said article 13 the board of public works has the control and management of said waterworks, and said board has power to appoint, with the consent of the mayor and the majority of the members of the upper house of the common council, such chief, superintendent, and subordinates as may be necessary for the management and efficient operation of said works, and as may be provided by ordinance. Said city is now, and has been for a long time, in possession of, owning, and operating a system of waterworks.
There was duly enacted by the said common council of said city, and duly approved by the mayor, on the 27th day of April, A. D. 1894, Ordinance No. 5,801, entitled "An ordinance relating to the management and control of waterworks." Sections 8 and 9 of said ordinance read as follows:
On the 4th day of November, 1895, the said board of public works, duly assembled, passed and declared the following resolution, as appears by the minutes and record kept and preserved by the secretary of said board:
On the same day, a copy of said foregoing resolution passed and declared by the board of public works, November 4th, appointing William L. Cameron superintendent of the waterworks, and duly attested by the secretary of said board, was by him delivered to Webster Davis, mayor of said Kansas City, for his approval. Thereupon, and on said day, the said Webster Davis, mayor of said city, duly approved the appointment of said W. L. Cameron, made by the board of public works, by marking his approval on the certified copy of said resolution, so delivered to him, which said approval appears thereon, by the following indorsement: Thereupon, the said Webster Davis, mayor of said city, delivered the said appointment of W. L. Cameron, with his approval indorsed thereon, or caused the same to be delivered, to Peter H. Tiernan, the duly-elected president of the upper house of the common council, and ex officio president of the said board of public works. Thereafter, said appointment was consented to by a majority of the members of the upper house of the common council of said city, in the following manner, to wit:
"
The proceedings had at and during the said meeting of the upper house of the common council, and of the members there present, on the evening of November 22d, were adopted and approved by the members of the said upper house of the common council at the meeting duly held on the evening of November 26, 1895. Upon the record and minutes of said meeting appears the following entry, made by the city clerk: "The council met in special session, pursuant to the call of the mayor, the proclamation having been published according to law; all members present, except Huttig and Johnson; and the minutes of the last meeting were approved." On the 4th day of December, 1895, the said board of public works of said city, at a meeting duly assembled, passed and declared the following resolution, as appears by the record and minutes of said meeting, made and kept by the secretary of said board, to wit: "Be it resolved, that the proper certificate of his appointment as superintendent of waterworks be issued to W. L. Cameron, and that he be notified to qualify and take possession of the office."...
To continue reading
Request your trial