Wiggins Ferry Co. v. East St. Louis
Supreme Court of the United States
Error to the Supreme Court of the State of Illinois. This was an action of debt brought in the City Court of East St. Louis, St. Clair County, Illinois, by the city of East St. Louis against a corporation of the State of Illinois, known as the Wiggins Ferry Company, to recover from it license money imposed by an ordinance of the city. The Ferry Company pleaded nil dehet.
Read the full summary
Error to the Supreme Court of the State of Illinois. This was an action of debt brought in the City Court of East St. Louis, St. Clair County, Illinois, by the city of East St. Louis against a corporation of the State of Illinois, known as the Wiggins Ferry Company, to recover from it license money imposed by an ordinance of the city. The Ferry Company pleaded nil dehet. By consent of parties the cause was submitted to the court on an agreed statement of facts, which is as follows: — Under and by authority of an act of the legislature of Illinois, entitled “An Act to authorize Samuel Wiggins…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Woods
The first contention of the plaintiff in error is that the fourth section of the act of 1819, which declared that the Wiggins Ferry should be subject to the same, taxes as were then or might thereafter be imposed on other ferries within the State, and under the same regulations and forfeitures, and the charter of the Wiggins Ferry Company, which authorized said company to use and enjoy the ferry franchise granted to Samuel Wiggins, and to use and enjoy all the rights, privileges, and emoluments recited in the preamble of the act as having been granted to Wiggins and his heirs and assigns,…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Gibbons v. OgdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
- Proprietors of the Charles River Bridge v. Proprietors of the Warren BridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1837
- Murdock v. City of MemphisSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Smith v. TurnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1849
- Jefferson Branch Bank v. SkellySupreme Court of the United States · 1862
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by88 opinions
- Pullman's Palace Car Co. v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. GrosjeanSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Douglas v. Seacoast Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Covington & Cincinnati Bridge Co. v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Ficklen v. Shelby County Taxing DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
83 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.