State v. Sloan

Decision Date26 May 1914
Docket NumberNo. 18087.,18087.
Citation167 S.W. 500,258 Mo. 305
PartiesSTATE v. SLOAN.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

Appeal from Circuit Court, Shannon County; W. N. Evans, Judge.

John Sloan was convicted of driving cattle into a county for the purpose of herding same there in violation of Rev. St. 1909, § 794, as amended by Laws 1911, p. 89, and he appeals. Reversed.

John H. Chitwood, of Ellington, and David M. Tesreau, of Fredericktown, for appellant. John T. Barker, Atty. Gen. (S. P. Howell, of Jefferson City, of counsel), for the State.

WALKER, P. J.

Under an information filed by the prosecuting attorney of Shannon county, based upon section 794, R. S. 1909, appellant was charged with driving cattle from Reynolds county into Shannon county for the purpose of herding same in the latter county. The offense charged is a misdemeanor, and is appealed to this court upon a challenge timely urged and properly preserved to the constitutionality of the statute. Upon a trial appellant was convicted and fined.

Appellant resided in Reynolds county, a little more than a mile from the Shannon county line. The offense is alleged to have been committed in August, 1913. In the fall of 1912 appellant told a witness that he (appellant)

"expected to run his cattle over in Shannon county on Powder Mill [a creek in that county] and salt them there, and that certain persons [naming them] could not keep him from it."

Witnesses for the state and for the appellant testified that they had seen appellant's cattle on the range in Shannon county within a year preceding the trial; during the summer of 1912 as many as 30 or 40 head of such cattle were seen, and at other times 10 or 15 head.

Appellant admitted that in the spring of 1913 he once drove his cattle for water to a pond located in Shannon county, about three-quarters of a mile from the county line. Other witnesses testified that appellant stated that he had twice so driven his cattle; appellant denies this, or that he ever drove his cattle across the county line with any other intention than to enable them to procure water.

I. Construction of Statute. Appellant contends that the act upon which the information herein is based is unconstitutional, in that its title is imperfect and misleading in failing to sufficiently indicate the purport of the act. An epitome of its history is pertinent. It was first enacted in 1874 (Laws 1874, p. 47) under the following title:

"An act to prevent nonresidents of the state from herding or grazing their cattle on certain lands in this state."

In the general revision of 1879 the act was carried forward as chapter 87, without revision, under the title of "Herding cattle by nonresidents." In 1887 (Laws 1887, p. 27) the act was amended; the changes then made not being material here, except as to the title, which was as follows:

"An act to amend section 4350, chapter 87, article 1, Revised Statutes of the state of Missouri, relating to herding cattle by nonresidents."

At the succeeding decennial revision in 1889, section 4350, supra, became section 945, and was amended so as to apply to residents, as well as nonresidents; the title, however, was not changed, but remained as before, "Herding cattle by nonresidents." In the regular revision of 1899 the entire chapter in regard to cattle was revised; but the title was not changed, being identical with that of 1889. In 1903 (Laws 1903, p. 57) article 1 of the chapter in regard to cattle was repealed, and a new article enacted in lieu thereof; the title being as follows:

"An act to repeal sections [naming all of the sections of article 1] chapter 88, Revised Statutes of the state of Missouri of 1899, entitled `Herding cattle by nonresidents,' and enacting seven new sections in lieu thereof to be known as sections [naming the new sections] with emergency clause."

It is not necessary to set forth at length the provisions of this act, except to say that they applied to residents, as well as nonresidents.

In the revision of 1909 an effort was made to compile under appropriate chapters all statutes of a kindred nature. Much of this compilation was mechanical, and was the work of the commission appointed by the General Assembly. There was no revision of the chapter entitled "animals," and the act of 1903, supra, was simply carried forward and inserted as article 6 of said chapter under the title of "Herding by nonresidents" (chapter 6, art. 6, R. S. 1909). In 1911 (Laws 1911, p. 89) the initial section (794) of said article 6, supra, was amended by adding certain words thereto. This prosecution is based upon the section thus amended—the title to the amendatory act of 1911 is as follows:

"An act to amend section 794 of article 6, of chapter 6, of the Revised Statutes of Missouri of 1909, entitled `Herding by nonresidents' by adding certain words thereto."

The body of the act is as follows:

"It shall be unlawful for any person to take or drive from any one county to another in this state, or from one range to another in the same county, any neat or horned...

To continue reading

Request your trial
70 cases
  • Edwards v. Business Men's Assurance Co., 38104.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 15, 1942
    ...statute, if it sufficiently indicates the substantial purpose of the law, it will not be violative of the Constitution. State v. Sloan, 258 Mo. 305, 313, 167 S.W. 500; State ex inf. Barrett v. Imhoff, 291 Mo. 603, 238 S.W. 122, We hold that the exclusion of a further defense in case of suit......
  • Sherrill v. Brantley, 30783.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 22, 1933
    ...v. Fulks, 207 Mo. 26; St. Louis v. Tiefel, 42 Mo. 578; State v. Hurley, 258 Mo. 275; Berry v. Milling Co., 284 Mo. 190; State v. Sloan, 258 Mo. 305; State v. Rawlings, 232 Mo. 554; State v. Wortman, 213 Mo. 131; State v. Revelle, 257 Mo. 529; State ex rel. v. Gordon, 233 Mo. 383; Hardware C......
  • Graff v. Priest
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • April 21, 1947
    ...or cover the regulation attempted by the body of the act. Fidelity Adjustment Co. v. Cook, 339 Mo. 45, 95 S.W. (2d) 1162; State v. Sloan, 258 Mo. 305, 167 S.W. 500; State v. Rawlings, 232 Mo. 544, 134 S.W. 530; State v. Fulks, 207 Mo. 26, 105 S.W. 733; St. Louis v. Wortman, 213 Mo. 131, 112......
  • State ex rel. Becker v. Wellston Sewer Dist., 31656.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • March 21, 1933
    ...28, Article IV, Const. of Mo.; State ex rel. v. Gideon, 277 Mo. 356; Nitzmann v. Railroad, 131 Mo. 612; In re Burris, 66 Mo. 442; State v. Sloan, 258 Mo. 305; State v. Hurley, 258 Mo. 275; State ex inf. v. Imhoff, 291 Mo. 603. (6) It is invalid because it violates Section 53 of Article IV o......
  • 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