Harrison v. State
Supreme Court of Missouri
APPEAL from St. Louis Criminal Court. The appellant contends that the city of St. Louis has exclusive jurisdiction by its charter, to license and regulate all ferries within its corporate limits, and refers to the following acts of the legislature: Sec. 2d, 3d art. of act chartering the city, approved the 8th February, 1839; page 160 of session acts, giving the city exclusive power within the city to license and regulate the keeping of ferries; and also fi d see. 3d art. of…
Read the full summary
APPEAL from St. Louis Criminal Court. The appellant contends that the city of St. Louis has exclusive jurisdiction by its charter, to license and regulate all ferries within its corporate limits, and refers to the following acts of the legislature: Sec. 2d, 3d art. of act chartering the city, approved the 8th February, 1839; page 160 of session acts, giving the city exclusive power within the city to license and regulate the keeping of ferries; and also fi d see. 3d art. of the charter, approved 15th Februáry, 1841, page 133 of' session acts, giving the same power as the charter of 1839; and…
1Opinion of the Court
Napton, J.3
delivered the opinion of the court.
■ The plaintiff in error was indicted by the grand jury of Sí Louis county, for keeping a ferry without a license from the county court, as required by the act regulating ferries, approved 26th February, 1835. *527The plaintiff in error had taken out a license from the city authorities of St. Louis, and the only question was, whether on this subject, the ferry being on the Mississippi, at the city of St. Louis, the city had exclusive priviliges. Unless there be something in the language of the city charter, to give it such exclusive right of taxation,…
2Cited by3 opinions
- State v. CowanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1860
- State v. HarperSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
- State v. ShermanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1872