City of Hannibal v. Winchell
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to Ralls Circuit Court. I. The city had power to condemn private property for the establishment of a public wharf. (Sess. Acts, 1851, p. 333, § 22; Sess. Acts 1860-1, p. 247, § 15; City of Hannibal vs. Han. & St. Joe E. E., 49 Mo., 480.) II. The power to take private property for opening a public wharf includes a priori the power to establish a public wharf.
Read the full summary
Error to Ralls Circuit Court. I. The city had power to condemn private property for the establishment of a public wharf. (Sess. Acts, 1851, p. 333, § 22; Sess. Acts 1860-1, p. 247, § 15; City of Hannibal vs. Han. & St. Joe E. E., 49 Mo., 480.) II. The power to take private property for opening a public wharf includes a priori the power to establish a public wharf. Statutes made in pari, materia are to be taken and construed together in the light of each other, the better to determine the ultimate object of inquiry. (6 Bac. Ab. Tit., Stat., 382; Eex vs. Loxdale, 1 Burr., 447; Church vs.…
1Opinion of the CourtNarton, Judge
The only question in this case seems to be in relation to the validity of a city ordinance of the city of Hannibal, passed February 9th, 1870. The proceedings under the ordinance, for the assessment of the damages to defendants, occasioned by the extension of the wharf in front of their property, are admitted to have been regnlar; but they were dismissed upon motion, for the reason that the city council had no power, at the time said proceedings were instituted, to condemn private property for a wharf. There were other objections, but this is the main one, and the only one necessary to be…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Davenport v. MagoonOregon Supreme Court · 1884
- Heiple v. Clackamas CountyOregon Supreme Court · 1890
- Levin v. HamiltonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1949