Hughes v. the City of Cairo.
| Decision Date | 30 June 1879 |
| Parties | CICERO N. HUGHESv.THE CITY OF CAIRO. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Alexander county; the Hon. DAVID J. BAKER, Judge, presiding.
This action was brought under section 110, chapter 24, Rev. Stat. 1874, by the City of Cairo, against Cicero N. Hughes, to recover of him $2 on each $100 of the net receipts of premiums for foreign insurance companies doing business in the city of Cairo, for which defendant was agent. The cause was submitted to a jury, who found the issues for plaintiff and assessed its damages at $200. The court overruled the motion made for a new trial and in arrest of judgment, and rendered judgment on the verdict, to reverse which defendant brings the case to this court on appeal.
Mr. SAMUEL P. WHEELER, for the appellant:
The important question in this controversy is, the constitutional validity of sec. 110, ch. 24, Rev. Stat. 1874, under which this suit is brought, and which permits a discrimination against insurance companies not incorporated under the laws of this State, imposing a burden upon them in the way of taxation from which domestic companies are exempt.
Section 1 of art 9 of the constitution of 1870, requires the tax levied upon “insurance” and other interests and business enumerated, to be “uniform as to the class upon which it operates.” If individuals of a class are singled out for exemption, there is manifest inequality in the rule of taxation. Cooley on Taxation, 128, and cases there cited.
The case of Ducat v. City of Chicago, 48 Ill. 172, presents the exact question in this case, with one exception, and that is, the limitation upon the power of the General Assembly found in the last clause of sec. 1, art. 9, of our present constitution, adopted since the decision of that case. That limitation is not found in the constitution of 1848, but should have a controlling effect in this case.Messrs. LINEGAR & LANSDEN, for the appellee, in support of the constitutionality of the act, cited City of East St. Louis v. Wehrung, 46 Ill. 393; The People v. Thurber, 13 Id. 554; State v. Fosdick, 21 La. Ann. 434; Burroughs on Taxation, 69, 150.
In the case of Western Union Tel. Co. v. Lieb et al. 76 Ill. 172, the court, speaking of foreign corporations, say: “There can be no doubt of the power of the legislature to impose taxation on such corporations, to whatever extent it may, in its discretion, choose, as the condition upon which the corporation shall be allowed to exercise its franchise and privileges in this State.” See also, C. M. H. A. Co. v. Rosenthal, 55 Ill. 85; Ducat v. City of Chicago, 48 Id. 172; same case, 10 Wall. 410; Paul v. Virginia, 8 Id. 168; Doyle v. Continental Ins. Co. 4 Otto.
There was no ground shown for the challenge of Mehner when called as a juror. In answer to a question propounded by defendant, the juror answered that he had “an opinion upon the question of the right of a foreign insurance company to do business in this State on the same terms and conditions as home companies.” It does not appear from the record what question was propounded to the juror, and his answer is so indefinite and general it can not be known whether his opinion, whatever it was, had any relation to the issues involved or to the merits of the case, and the objection to his competency was properly overruled.
An ordinance of the city, introduced in evidence, shows that provision had been made for a fire department, and the testimony given establishes the fact a fire department was organized and was in actual operation.
Evidence was introduced that the insurance companies doing business in Cairo for which defendant was agent and received premiums, were not companies “incorporated under the laws of this State,” and as defendant has not assigned for error that incompetent testimony was admitted at the trial, it might well be understood, if any objection to the testimony offered to prove that fact existed it was waived. But aside from this view, the testimony offered was competent, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Strauss v. State
... ... Bank, 170 U.S. 283, 294, 42 L.Ed. 1037, 1043, 18 S.Ct ... 594; Cotting v. Kansas City Stock Yards Co. (Cotting v ... Godard) 183 U.S. 79, 111, 46 L.Ed. 92, 109, 22 S.Ct. 30; ... distinctions are numerous and apply to different subjects ... Hughes v. Cairo, 92 Ill. 339; Home Ins. Co. v ... Swigert, 104 Ill. 653; Union Cent. L. Ins. Co. v ... ...
-
Moody v. Hagen
... ... v. Pennsylvania, 136 U.S. 114, 34 L.Ed. 394, 3 ... Inters. Com. Rep. 178, 10 S.Ct. 958; Hughes v ... Cairo, 92 Ill. 339; Home Ins. Co. v. Swigert, ... 104 Ill. 653; Union Cent. L. Ins. Co ... ...
-
Humphreys v. State
... ... State, 28 Md. 577; Pullen v. Wake Co., 66 N. C., 361; Peters ... v. City, 76 Va. 927; Schoolfield v. City, 78 Va. 367; Paul v ... Virginia, 8 Wall., 168; Fire Ins. Co. v ... Outagamie County, 76 ... Wis. 587; Northern Pacific Ry. Co. v. Barnes, 51 N.W. 386; ... Hughes v. Cairo, 92 Ill. 339; Coal Co. v. Finlen, 124 Ill ... 666; Cincinnati, etc., Railroad Co. v ... ...
-
Hanover Fire Ins. Co. v. Carr
...as compensation for the right to do business, is not, therefore, an infraction of this provision of the Constitution. Hughes v. City of Cairo, 92 Ill. 339; Ducat v. City of Chicago, supra; Walker v. City of Springfield, supra; People v. Thurber, supra; Insurance Co. v. Bradley, 83 S. C. 418......