Carpenter v. Jennings

• Decision Date: 31 January 1875
• Citation: 77 Ill. 250,1875 WL 8297
• Parties: GEORGE CARPENTERv.ELISHA C. JENNINGS et al.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

77 Ill. 250

1875 WL 8297 (Ill.)

GEORGE CARPENTER

v.ELISHA C. JENNINGS et al.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

January Term, 1875.

APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Sangamon county; the Hon. CHARLES S. ZANE, Judge, presiding.

This was a petition for a writ of certiorari, filed by George Carpenter against Elisha C. Jennings and others, commissioners of highways of the town of Springfield, to review their proceedings in laying out a highway.

Messrs. HERNDON & ORENDORFF, for the appellant.

Messrs. HAMILTON & RICE, for the appellees.

Mr. JUSTICE CRAIG delivered the opinion of the Court:

This was a petition filed by appellant, in the circuit court of Sangamon county, for a common law writ of certiorari, for the purpose of bringing the record of the proceedings of the commissioners of highways of the town of Springfield, in laying out a public road over appellant's land, for review before the court. The court denied the prayer of the petition for a writ, and rendered judgment against appellant for costs, and he brings the record here by appeal.

A complete copy of the proceedings of the commissioners of highways in laying out the road was attached to the petition, and made a part thereof, from which it appears that a portion of appellant's land was taken for the road, and no compensation was allowed for the land taken.

Various objections have been urged by appellant to the validity of the proceedings of the commissioners of highways, but in the view we take of the record before us, it will only be necessary to consider one question, as the decision of that will be decisive of the case.

The question is, had the commissioners of highways the right to take and appropriate appellant's land for a public road, without compensation being made for the land taken?

In section 13 of article 2 of the constitution it is declared, that private property shall not be taken or damaged for public use, without just compensation. Such compensation, when not made by the State, shall be ascertained by a jury, as shall be prescribed by law.

This section of the constitution was the supreme law of the State at the time the proceedings were had to condemn appellant's land for a public road.

The land of the citizen can not be taken without compensation being made. The prohibition is absolute.

It was evidently the intent of the framers of the article, and of the people when they ratified it by their votes, that the full value of land taken should be paid in money, alone, disregarding all benefits and advantages that might result to that portion of the owner's land not taken, by reason of the construction of the road.

It was the clear legal right of appellant to be paid for his land taken by the commissioners of highways for the public, of which he could not...