Stone v. Southern Illinois Missouri Bridge Company
| Decision Date | 13 May 1907 |
| Docket Number | No. 253,253 |
| Citation | 51 L.Ed. 1057,27 S.Ct. 615,206 U.S. 267 |
| Parties | R. G. STONE, R. M. Finley, and Nannie E. Finley, Plffs. in Err., v. SOUTHERN ILLINOIS & MISSOURI BRIDGE COMPANY |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs. Shepard Barclay, Madison R. Smith, and Thomas T. Fauntleroy for plaintiffs in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 268-269 intentionally omitted] Messrs. Martin L. Clardy and Alexander G. Cochran for defendant in error.
On March 3, 1899, Congress passed an act providing, among other things:
'That it shall not be lawful to construct or commence the construction of any bridge, etc., . . . over . . . any . . . navigable river . . . of the United States until the consent of Congress to the building of such structures shall have been obtained, and until the plans for the same shall have been submitted to and approved by the Chief of Engineers and by the Secretary of War.'
The act further provided:
'That when plans for any bridge or other structure have been approved by the Chief of Engineers and by the Secretary of War, it shall not be lawful to deviate from such plans either before or after completion of the structure, unless the modification of said plans has previously been submitted to and received the approval of the Chief of Engineers and of the Secretary of War.' 30 Stat. at L. 1151, § 9, chap. 425, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 3540.
On January 26, 1901, Congress passed an act (31 Stat. at L. 741, chap. 181) authorizing the Southern Illinois & Missouri Bridge Company (defendant in error), a corporation of the state of Illinois, to erect, construct, maintain, and operate a bridge and ap- proaches thereto over the Mississippi river from a point on the Mississippi river in Alexander county, in the state of Illinois, opposite the terminus of the St. Louis Southwestern Railway, at or near Gray's Point, in Scott county, in the state of Missouri, or from some other convenient point on said river in said Alexander county, Illinois, to some opposite point on said river in the state of Missouri, within the distance of 3 miles above or below the terminus of said railway.
The bridge was to be constructed for the passage of railway trains, and, at the option of the corporation, might be so constructed as to provide for the use thereof by wagons, vehicles, and the transit of foot passengers and animals at such reasonable tolls as might be approved by the Secretary of War.
It was also provided that the bridge constructed under the act and subject to its limitations should be a lawful structure and recognized and known as a post route of the United States.
Section 5 provides:
'That the approaches to the bridge built under this act shall be so designed and constructed as not to interfere with the free discharge of the river in seasons of flood; and any encroachment on the high-water cross sections by piers, solid embankments, or otherwise, which might result in unduly accelerating the high-water current at the site of the bridge, shall not be allowed.'
Section 7 provides for the submission to the Secretary of War of the drawings of the bridge, piers, approaches, and accessory works and a map of the location, giving, for the space of at least 2 miles above and 1 mile below the proposed site, the topography of the banks of the river and the shore lines at high and low water. The maps and drawings are to be referred to the board of officers of the Corps of Engineers, United States Army, for examination and report.
Provision is made for hearing objections to the construction of the bridge, and it is provided that the proposed bridge shall be a lawful structure only when built in accordance with the plans recommended by the Board of Engineers and approved by the Chief of Engineers and by the Secretary of War, and while so managed and kept in repair as to offer at all times reasonable and proper means for the passage of rafts, steamboats, and other water craft under the said bridge, and while said requirements are observed.
Section 10 provides for alterations and changes as may be required by the Secretary of War, in accordance with existing law, in the bridge constructed under the provisions of the act, so as to preserve free and convenient navigation. Such changes were to be made, under the direction of the Secretary of War, at the expense of the persons, companies, or corporations owning, controlling, and operating the bridge.
Section 11 provides that the bridge shall be constructed under the general supervision of the Secretary of War, and no changes or alterations in the plan shall be made during the construction of said bridge or after its completion, unless recommended by the Chief of Engineers and approved by the Secretary of War.
The act makes provision for the preservation of the navigable channel during the construction of the bridge.
Section 12 provides that whenever Congress shall decide that the public interests require it, the right to order the removal of the bridge at the expense of the owners is expressly reserved, without liability for damages on the part of the United States.
Section 13 provides that if the bridge is not commenced within one year and completed within three years from the date of the approval of the act, the same shall be null and void, and the rights thereby conferred ceased and determine.
The Southern Illinois & Missouri Bridge Company, in pursuance of this act, submitted its drawings and plans and the same were duly approved as required by law.
The bridge company, on the 24th day of April, 1902, filed its petition in the circuit court of Scott county, Missouri, for the appropriation of a strip of land containing 20.3 acres, said to be approximately 4,000 feet long and 200 feet wide, alleging that it is necessary to have a right of way for the railway tracks, bridge, and terminal yards of the company, and, for the purpose of carrying out its charter privileges, it is necessary to hold and own the described tract.
On trial in the circuit court that cour...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Alabama Power Co. v. Gulf Power Co.
... ... for instance, to bridge, obstruct, divert, or improve, and ... the like, ... Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1, 194, 6 L.Ed. 23; ... Stone v. Sou. Ill. Bridge Co., 206 U.S. 267, 27 ... ...
-
School Dist. of Clayton v. Kelsey
... ... Reed, 56 Mo ... 565; Southern Ill. v. Missouri Bridge Co., 194 Mo ... 175, 92 S.W. 475; Stone v. Southern & Mo. Bridge ... Co., 27 S.Ct. 615, ... and the vice president of the real estate company which ... handled the recent sale to the school ... Philadelphia et al., 144 F.2d 626. The Illinois ... case, in effect, rules that an unexecuted ... ...
-
School District of Clayton v. Kelsey
...States of America v. Reed, 56 Mo. 565; Southern Ill. v. Missouri Bridge Co., 194 Mo. 175, 92 S.W. 475; Stone v. Southern & Mo. Bridge Co., 27 S. Ct. 615, 206 U.S. 267, 51 L. Ed. 1057. (2) The trial court specifically found that the purpose for which the land was sought to be condemned was a......
-
People ex rel. Lehigh Valley Ry. Co. v. State Tax Comm'n
...of administrative officers. Cummings v. Chicago, 188 U. S. 410, 429, 23 S. Ct. 472, 47 L. Ed. 525;Stone v. Southern Illinois & M. Bridge Co., 206 U. S. 267, 274, 27 S. Ct. 615, 51 L. Ed. 1057; International Bridge Co. v. People of State of New York, supra; Miller v. New York, 109 U. S. 385,......