Klawanski v. People

• Court: Illinois Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: RICKS
• Citation: Klawanski v. People, 218 Ill. 481, 75 N.E. 1028 (Ill. 1905)
• Decision Date: 20 December 1905
• Parties: KLAWANSKI et al. v. PEOPLE.

218 Ill. 481

75 N.E. 1028

KLAWANSKI et al.

v.PEOPLE.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Dec. 20, 1905.

Error to Criminal Court, Cook County; W. M. McEwen, Judge.

James Klawanski and Walter Council were convicted of forgery, and bring error. Reversed.

Wilkin, Boggs, and Hand, JJ., dissenting.

Cantwell & Erbstein and Charles P. R. Macaulay, for plaintiffs in error.

William H. Stead, Atty. Gen., and John J. Healy, State's Atty., for the People.

RICKS, J.

Plaintiffs in error, James Klawanski and Walter Council, were indicted in the criminal court of Cook county for forging and uttering as true and genuine a certain false and counterfeited complimentary theater pass, with intent to defraud, etc. Upon being arraigned they pleaded guilty and were each sentenced to the penitentiary. After sentence they moved in arrest of judgment, and the court overruled the same. This writ of error is sued out to review the record of that proceeding.

But two questions are raised: First, as to the sufficiency of the indictment; second, whether the sufficiency of the indictment can be urged for the first time after plea of guilty. Both counts of the indictment are substantially the same, and charge, in substance, as follows:

‘The grand jurors * * * present that one James Klawanski and one Walter Council * * * on December 21, 1904, in said county of Cook, in the state of Illinois, did feloniously, fraudulently and falsely make, forge and counterfeit a certain complimentary theater pass, which said false, forged and counterfeit complimentary theater pass is in the words and figures following, to wit:

“McVicker's Theatre

“Jacob Litt, Sole Prop.

Sol. Litt, Bus. Mgr.

“Admit Two-Date Dec. 21 1904.

Order No. 344.

“On Account .....

“Notice. This is a complimentary pass, given in consideration for displaying our advertisement at the above number, and the management reserves the right to refuse admission if presented by any objectionable person, and positively not good if bought or sold or misused in any manner.

“Adv. Agent, James Batles.'

-with intent then and there to prejudice, damage and defraud Jacob Litt; and the grand jurors aforesaid, upon their oaths aforesaid, do say that by reason of the premises aforesaid the said James Klawanski and the said Walter Council are deemed guilty of forgery contrary to the statute and against the peace and dignity of the same people of the state of Illinois.'

The statute governing the offense charged in section 105 of the Criminal Code (Hurd's Rev. St. 1903, p. 635, c. 38), which, so far as is material to this case, is as follows: ‘Every person who shall falsely make, alter, forge or counterfeit any * * * ticket or pass * * * for the admission of any person to any entertainment for which a consideration is required, * * * shall be imprisoned in the penitentiary not less than one year nor more than fourteen years.’ The complimentary ticket was good only for December 21, 1904. The statute reads, ‘to any entertainment for which a consideration is required.’ Certainly a court could not take judicial notice of the fact that a consideration was required for the admittance of persons on the night of December 21, 1904, for an entertainment. Managers and owners of theaters have various kinds of entertainments for which tickets are issued, where no fee is charged for admittance. Frequently theaters are used for the purpose of political and religious meetings, for which no fee is charged for admittance, and yet the parties managing the entertainment, whatever it may be, might issue tickets, and no person would be allowed to enter the hall without first presenting a ticket issued by the managers or persons in charge. Nor is any averment made in the indictment with reference to Jacob Litt or James...