Cecil v. Green

• Decision Date: 12 May 1896
• Citation: 161 Ill. 265,43 N.E. 1105
• Parties: CECIL v. GREEN.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

161 Ill. 265

43 N.E. 1105

CECIL

v.GREEN.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

May 12, 1896.

Appeal from appellate court, Third district.

Action by Abraham D. Cecil against Hamer H. Green for refusal to sell plaintiff soda water, on account of his color. From a judgment of the appellate court, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant (60 Ill. App. 61), plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.Charles M. Peirce, for appellant.

Rowell, Neville & Lindley, for appellee.

The original declaration in this case contained two counts, the first of which alleges that the defendant, in a building occupied by him, was engaged in the drug business, and, in connection therewith, kept for sale certain refreshments, to wit, soda water, ice-cream soda, water, ginger ale, phosphate, cherry phosphate, root beer, etc.; that the plaintiff tendered the price of cherry phosphate, and was refused, and was informed that it was on account of his color. The second count alleges that the defendant was engaged in the public business, and kept for sale to the public certain refreshments, to wit, the same articles mentioned above, and that the plaintiff, on the ___ day of August, 1894, entered said place of business and tendered the price of certain article kept for sale by the defendant (without mentioning the name of the article), and was informed by the defendant that he could not purchase such article of him. This count does not allege any reason for the refusal. A demurrer was interposed to these counts. Subsequently, by leave of the court, three other special counts were filed, the first two of which were withdrawn, and the third allowed to stand. This count was demurred to. It alleges in substance that on the ___ day of August, 1894, the defendant was engaged in running a soda fountain for public accommodation, and that said soda fountain was a place of public accommodation, and the defendant kept certain articles for sale at said place of business, to wit, the same articles mentioned in the first count, and that the plaintiff, being a colored citizen, on the ___ day of August, 1894, entered said place of the defendant, and tendered the ‘ordinary price for which said articles kept by said Hamer H. Green for public accommodation were sold to the public in general,’ and that the defendant refused to sell said articles to plaintiff, on account of his color. The court sustained demurrer to each of these counts, and the judgment was affirmed by the appellate court of the Third district, and this appeal is prosecuted.

PHILLIPS, J. (after stating the facts).

This case presents for construction the provisions of an act entitled ‘An act to protect all citizens in their civil and legal rights, and fixing a penalty for violation of the same,’ approved June 10, 1885, section 1 of which reads as follows: ‘That all persons within the jurisdiction of said state shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the accommodations,...