Crawford v. People Ex Rel. Julian S. Rumsey.

• Decision Date: 30 September 1876
• Citation: 82 Ill. 557,1876 WL 10256
• Parties: W. W. CRAWFORD et al.v.THE PEOPLE ex rel. Julian S. Rumsey.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

82 Ill. 557

1876 WL 10256 (Ill.)

W. W. CRAWFORD et al.

v.THE PEOPLE ex rel. Julian S. Rumsey.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

September Term, 1876.

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. JOHN G. ROGERS, Judge, presiding.

Messrs. MCDAID & WILSON, for the appellants.

Mr. F. A. SMITH, for the appellees.

Mr. JUSTICE WALKER delivered the opinion of the Court:

The board of trustees of the town of Cicero, in Cook county, adopted an ordinance for graveling a portion of Madison street in that town. The ordinance provided that $400 of the cost be paid by the town, and $39,600 be levied on the property of individuals benefited by the improvement; and the ordinance recites that the “board of trustees having, on proper examination made by the board, ascertained and determined that there is real estate within said town which will be benefited by the said improvement, to the amount hereby ordered to be specially assessed,” the board of trustees appointed commissioners to make the assessment.

The oath signed and sworn to by the commissioners is this:

“We, the undersigned, commissioners, etc., do solemnly swear that we will assess the said amount of $39,600 upon the real estate deemed benefited by said improvement, in proportion to the special benefits resulting thereto, as nearly as may be, in conformity with said ordinance, and that we will faithfully and impartially make such assessment according to the best of our ability.”

The commissioners reported to the trustees that they had made the assessment upon the real estate deemed specially benefited by the improvement, in proportion, as nearly as may be, to the special benefit to each separate lot, or parcel thereof. They also say, in the conclusion of their report: “And do hereby assess the amount to each separate lot, or parcel of real estate, in the foregoing assessment roll mentioned, in their approximate return, as the special benefits resulting thereto from said completed improvement.” They also report that they gave notice, by posting the same in three of the most public places in the town, of the times and places of making the assessment, to all persons to appear, if they chose, and that they were present at the time and place named. There was notice given of the time fixed to consider whether the report would be affirmed.

It is urged that this proceeding is insufficient, in the fact that the trustees directed that $39,600 be assessed upon real estate deemed benefited by the improvement, in proportion, as nearly as may be, to the special benefits resulting to each separate lot, piece or parcel of such real estate, without regard to the extent or amount of the benefits received, and that the return is in accordance with the oath of the commissioners; that the ordinance and their oath did not require them to ascertain the amount that each piece or parcel of ground would be benefited, and assess no more than that amount of such benefit, or less, if such was its proportion; but that they required them to apportion the whole amount on property deemed benefited, at a proportionate rate, although the amount imposed on each tract might be more than the benefit conferred.

If these propositions are true, then the...