Greenfield v. Russel

• Decision Date: 21 April 1920
• Docket Number: No. 12881.,12881.
• Parties: GREENFIELD v. RUSSEL, Auditor of Public Accounts, et al.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

292 Ill. 392

127 N.E. 102

GREENFIELD

v.RUSSEL, Auditor of Public Accounts, et al.

No. 12881.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

April 21, 1920.

Petition by Walter E. Greenfield to restrain Andrew Russel, Auditor of Public Accounts, and another, from paying out funds of the State. From an order refusing to allow the bill to be filed, the petitioner appeals.

Reversed and remanded, with directions.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Sangamon County; Frank W. Burton, judge.

Felsenthal, Wilson & Struckmann, of Chicago, and Theodore Forby, of Zion City, for appellant.

Edward J. Brundage, Atty. Gen., and Clarence N. Boord, of Springfield, for appellees.

DUNCAN, J.

Appellant presented a petition to the circuit court of Sangamon county, accompanied by a bill of complaint, to restrain appellees, as Auditor of Public Accounts and State Treasurer, respectively, from paying out funds of the state by reason of House Bill No. 602, and asked leave to file the bill. The circuit court refused to allow the bill to be filed, and this appeal followed.

The petition was filed in accordance with ‘An act in relation to suits to restrain and enjoin the disbursement of public moneys by officers of the state.’ Laws of 1917, p. 534. That act provides that a suit in equity to restrain and enjoin the disbursement of public moneys by the proper officer or officers of the state may be maintained either by the Attorney General or by any citizen and taxpayer of the state, and when begun by a citizen of the state shall be commenced by a petition for leave to file a bill in equity, etc. If upon a hearing the court or the judge thereof shall be satisfied that there is reasonable ground for the filing of such bill, such court or judge may grant the petition and order the bill to be filed and process issued, and, if such petition is denied, an appeal may be prosecuted to this court.

The material allegations in the bill relied on by appellant are: That the petitioner is, and for several years has been, a citizen and resident and taxpayer of this state, and that the appellees, Andrew Russel and Fred E. Sterling, are, respectively, the Auditor of Public Accounts and Treasurer of the State of Illinois; that a certain joint resolution was introduced and passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate of Illinois known as House Joint Resolution No. 7, and was afterwards superseded by another joint resolution known as House Joint Resolution No. 11, the latter being the same as the former with slight amendments; and that as amended the resolution is as follows:

‘House Joint Resolution No. 11.

‘Whereas, an institution calling itself ‘The Christian Catholic Apostolic Church of Zion,’ located at Zion City, in the state of Illinois, and one Wilbur Glenn Voliva, the owner or pretended owner of all or nearly all the real estate in said city, and by profession claims to be endowed with supernatural powers and is represented as claiming direct communication with divine power; and

‘Whereas, it is represented that said institution and its said pretended owner and overseer, Wilbur Glenn Voliva, through such supernatural and divine powers is and has been enticing and encouraging citizens of this and other states to invest large sums of money in leases of land in said city and in other Zion enterprises, and by and through such leases pretending to extend over a period of a thousand years, it is charged that the same is a mere means and pretense to secure and inveigle the moneys and property of innocent persons under the guise of a false and fictitious religion, and that said institution through that and other means is using the city government of Zion City, the schools of said city and the courts of said city to carry out its illegal and fraudulent purposes in securing property and oppressing those citizens of the state of Illinois who do not conform to the pretended beliefs of said institution, and that in many other and divers ways, as it is represented, the said institution and its overseer, by controlling the rents, lots and homes, the business, the municipal school and judicial government of said city, is and has become a blot upon the state of Illinois and is and has been depriving citizens of said city of the rights of citizenship and of a free government, and is and has been misrepresenting and fraudulently stating to the public its financial status and its religious beliefs, and is being run for the purpose of defrauding the public; and

‘Whereas, there are other persons, institutions and pretended organizations soliciting funds, deceiving the people and preying upon the public of the like and similar nature:

‘Therefore be it

‘ Resolved by the house of representatives, the senate concurring therein, that a committee of nine be appointed, five from the house and four from the senate, to investigate the said institution and said other persons, institutions and pretended organizations; and be it further

‘ Resolved, that said committee is hereby fully authorized to take evidence and have the power to summon before it, or such subcommittee as said committee may appoint, witnesses and documents as said committee may find necessary to do to fully and completely investigate and examine into all of the affairs of said institutions and said overseer and said other persons, institutions and pretended organizations, and to report the same, with the recommendations of said committee, to both houses of the General Assembly; and be it further

‘ Resolved, that said committee have full power, with the assent of the speaker of the house, to employ a sergeant at arms and a secretary and such stenographers as may be necessary to fully and completely carry out said investigation.’

It is further alleged that the words, ‘There are other persons, institutions and pretended organizations soliciting funds,’ etc., which are found in the third paragraph of the resolution above set forth, all in italics, were added to the original resolution as a mere subterfuge and in an attempt to create a legal and lawful subject of inquiry of said committee, and that it was never intended that the committee should investigate any other persons than those named in the original resolution. It is also alleged that House Bill No. 602 was regularly passed by both branches of the Legislature and signed by the Governor, providing, in substance, that there is appropriated by the General Assembly the sum of $5,000 for the necessary expenses of a joint committee created by resolution No. 11, and providing that the Auditor of Public Accounts is authorized to draw his warrants on that appropriation, upon presentation of vouchers certified to as correct by the chairman of the committee and approved by the speaker of the House of Representatives and the president of the Senate, and that the state is authorized and directed to pay them, and that it became a law at once by an emergency clause; that pursuant to said resolution a committee of ten members, five from each house, was selected, and that they met at Chicago and proceeded to hear evidence in accordance with the resolution, after selecting a chairman; that it is their purpose to hold other meetings and incur further expenses in carrying out said resolution and to present vouchers for all such expenses: that the auditorintends to and will issue vouchers for said expenses, and that the treasurer threatens and intends to pay the same unless prevented by order of court. The prayer of the bill is that appellees be restrained and enjoined from drawing or paying any warrants for such expenses.

Two grounds are urged by appellant for a reversal of the decree of the court: (1) That the General Assembly was without authority or power to pass said resolution or to incur any expenses whatever thereunder, as charged in the bill; (2) that the members of the committee, being members of the Legislature, are not legally entitled to be paid their personal expenses for such services.

When properly analyzed, the foregoing resolution is in three parts. The first part-the first paragraph of the resolution-sets forth the subject or the persons that are to be particularly and specially considered or treated. These persons are set forth in that paragraph as the Christian Catholic Apostolic Church of Zion, located at Zion City, in this state, and one Wilbur Glenn Voliva, who is referred to as the owner or pretended owner of all or nearly all of the real estate in that city, and one who by profession claims to be endowed with supernatural powers and claims direct communication with divine power. The second part of the resolution consists of various charges of offenses or misdoings by said church and Wilbur Glenn Voliva, the latter being styled overseer and pretended owner of said church. These charges profess to be on...