The State ex rel. Steel v. Baker

• Decision Date: 02 July 1895
• Parties: The State ex rel. Steel, Collector, Appellant, v. Baker
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

31 S.W. 924

129 Mo. 482

The State ex rel. Steel, Collector, Appellant, v. Baker

Supreme Court of Missouri, Second Division

July 2, 1895

Appeal from New Madrid Circuit Court. -- Hon. D. W. Shackleford Special Judge.

Affirmed.

Robt. S. Rutledge for appellant.

(1) The act of March 14, 1872, does not relate to any subject other than that disclosed by the title of the bill. The act is not in contravention of the constitutional inhibition and ought not to be disturbed. St. Louis v. Tiefel, 42 Mo 578; State v. Mathews, 44 Mo. 523; State v Miller, 45 Mo. 495; St. Louis v. Green, 7 Mo.App. 468; Hannibal v. County, 69 Mo. 571; State ex rel. v. Ranson, 73 Mo. 78; State ex rel. v. Shepard, 74 Mo. 310; State ex rel. v. Dolan, 93 Mo. 467; State ex rel. v. Finn, 8 Mo.App. 341.

Russell & Deal for respondent.

(1) The sole question for the determination of this court is the validity of the act of the general assembly, approved March 14, 1872. See Acts, 1872, p. 23. Prior to that date the land in question was in Mississippi county. Secs. 84 and 87, chap. 34, G. S. 1865. By the act of 1872 the legislature seems to have undertaken to change the boundary lines between Mississippi and New Madrid counties, which, if valid, placed the land in question in New Madrid county. The respondent contended, and the court below held, the act of 1872 to be unconstitutional and invalid for the reasons hereinafter given. (2) The title of the act of 1872 was as follows: "An act to better define the boundary lines between New Madrid, Scott, Stoddard and Wayne counties." The title only indicated that the act was to "better define" -- not to change the boundaries. This act was inoperative, at least so far as it purported to affect the Mississippi county line. Article 4, sec. 32, Const. 1865. (3) The act was also violative of the constitution, for the reason that the area of Mississippi county was already less than five hundred square miles. Const. 1865, art. 4, sec. 31. This has been squarely decided by this court. Woods v. Henry, 55 Mo. 560. Mississippi county never in its history contained more than about four hundred and thirty square miles, and of this the court takes judicial notice. Wood v. Henry, above cited; Lesueur's Official Manual, 1893-4, p. 350. (4) This judgment being void, the execution was, of course, void, and was properly quashed by the court from whence it issued. Mellier v. Bartlett, 89 Mo. 134.

Gantt, P. J. Sherwood and Burgess, JJ., concur.

OPINION

Gantt, P. J.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the circuit court of New Madrid county quashing an execution issued upon a judgment of said court in favor of the state of Missouri at the relation of George W. Steel, collector of revenue of said county against Hurbert Baker, the respondent herein, for certain delinquent taxes found therein to be due to the state and county and certain special taxes.

The defendant filed his motion in proper time to quash the execution for the reasons that the lands were not and never had been in New Madrid county; that the court had no jurisdiction over the person of defendant nor of the subject-matter of the act. The motion was sustained by the circuit court and the collector appeals therefrom.

I. The sole and only question for our determination is the validity of the act of the general assembly of this state approved March 14, 1872. Session Laws of 1872, p. 23. Prior to that time the land, all of section 35, township 26 of range 14 was in Mississippi county. By the act of 1872 the legislature endeavored to change the boundary lines between Mississippi and New Madrid counties and if the act was valid it placed the land in suit in New Madrid county.

The respondent contended, and the circuit court held, that the said act of March 14, 1872, was unconstitutional as to Mississippi county because in contravention of section 32 of article 4 of the constitution of 1865, Mississippi county not having been mentioned among the counties whose boundaries were to be defined or changed; and, second, because the title of the act only indicated that the act was to "better define," not to change, the boundaries, and said act was unconstitutional because the area of Mississippi county was reduced thereby when it was already less in area than five hundred square miles.

Section 33 of article 4 of the constitution of 1865 in force as a part of the organic law when the act of 1872 in question was enacted, provided that "no law enacted by the general assembly shall relate to more than one subject and that shall be expressed in the title; but if any subject embraced in an act be not expressed in the title, such act shall be void only as to so much thereof as is not so expressed."

The title to the act of March 14, 1872, is in these words: "An act to better define the boundary lines between New Madrid, Scott, Stoddard and Wayne counties." Now, there is in this title not the slightest intimation of any purpose to change the boundary line between New Madrid and Mississippi counties. Moreover Mississippi lying east of New Madrid and Scott a change of the boundaries between them would not even incidentally affect the boundaries of Mississippi. Such a title gave no notice to the representative of Mississippi county that it was proposed thereby to lop off a portion of said county.

This act demonstrates the wisdom of the constitution in requiring the title to express the subject of the act. It was this very evil the constitution proposed to prevent. The act is a palpable violation of the constitution and so much thereof as purported to change the boundary line between New Madrid and Mississippi counties was unconstitutional and therefore void. State v. Miller, 45 Mo. 495.

Being void, the boundaries of Mississippi county remained as defined in section 84 of chapter 34, General Statutes, 1865 and hence the land against which the circuit court of New Madrid county sought to...