Inwagen v. the City of Chicago.
| Decision Date | 30 September 1871 |
| Citation | 61 Ill. 31,1871 WL 8195 |
| Parties | JAMES VAN INWAGENv.THE CITY OF CHICAGO. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Chicago; the Hon. WILLIAM A. PORTER, Judge, presiding.
Messrs. HIGGINS, SWETT & QUIGG, for the appellant.
Mr. M. F. TULEY, for the appellee. Mr. JUSTICE BREESE delivered the opinion of the Court:
This was an action of debt, brought to the Superior Court of Chicago, by the city of Chicago, against James Van Inwagen, to recover of him two per centum on the premiums paid to him as agent of the Astor Insurance Company of New York.
The plea was nil debit. The issue was tried by the court, who found for the plaintiff the amount claimed, namely: two hundred and thirty-seven dollars and eight cents, and rendered judgment accordingly, to reverse which defendant appeals and assigns the general errors.
The amount recovered was for the two per cent on premiums received from the first day of January, 1868, to the first day of January, 1869. The action was brought to the March term, 1870, under the act entitled “An act to reduce the charter of the city of Chicago and the several acts amendatory thereof into one act, and to revise the same,” approved February 13, 1863.
Section 5 of that act provides as follows: “All corporations, companies or associations not incorporated under the laws of this State, engaged in said city in effecting fire, marine or life insurance, shall pay to the city treasurer the sum of two dollars upon the hundred dollars, and at that rate upon the amount of all premiums which, during the half year ending on the first day of July and January, shall have been received or have agreed to have been paid for any insurance effected or agreed to be effected in said city by or with such corporations, companies or associations respectively.”
The defense was, that this section was repealed by section 30 of “An act to incorporate and to govern fire, marine and inland navigation insurance companies,” approved March 10, 1869. Section 30 is as follows: “Every agent of any insurance company incorporated by the authority of any other State or government, shall return to the proper officer of the county, town or municipality in which the agency is established, in the month of May annually, the amount of the net receipts of such agency, which shall be entered on the tax lists of the county, town and municipality, and subject to the same rate of taxation for all purposes, State, county, town and municipal, that other personal property is subject to at the place where located--said tax to be in lieu of all town and municipal licenses; and all laws and parts of laws inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed: Provided, that the provisions of this section shall not be construed to prohibit cities having an organized fire department from levying a tax or license fee not exceeding two per cent, in accordance with the provisions of their respective charters, said gross receipts to be applied exclusively to the fire department of such city.” Session Laws 1869, p. 209.
It is claimed by appellant that this section is inconsistent with the fifth section of the act of 1863, above recited, in these respects: 1. That the moneys to be collected under the act of 1869 are to be applied to a different purpose from the moneys collected under the act of 1863. 2. The provision as to the returns are different, the act of 1863...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Atkins v. Deere & Co.
...law as completely from the records as if it had never passed, and it must be considered as a law that never existed." Van Inwagen v. City of Chicago, 61 Ill. 31, 34 (1871) (citing Key v. Goodwin, 4 Moore & Payne 341 (Ex. Ch. 1830), and Dwarris on Statutes 676). More recently, this court hel......
- The Lake Shore v. Berlink
-
People ex rel. Eitel v. Lindheimer
...were not vested. The same principles were applied, with similar holdings, in Holcomb v. Boynton, 151 Ill. 294, 37 N.E. 1031;Van Inwagen v. City of Chicago, 61 Ill. 31;People v. Board of Com'rs, 176 Ill. 576, 52 N.E. 334;County of Manard v. Kincaid, 71 Ill. 587; Mix v. Illinois Central Railr......
-
Eastgate v. Osago School Dist. of Nelson County
... ... State, 58 Ind. 244; Bennet v. Hargus, 1 Neb ... 419; Bailey v. Mason, 4 Minn. 546; Van Inwagen ... v. Chicago, 61 Ill. 31; Wirt v. Board of ... Supervisors, 35 N.Y.S. 887; Butler v. Palmer, 1 ... There ... was no statute making it the duty of a committee of the city ... council to employ counsel, as was done in the Bosard Case, ... and it further appears that in ... ...