Page v. People Ex Rel. Herman G. Weber

• Decision Date: 21 June 1881
• Citation: 99 Ill. 418,1881 WL 10560
• Parties: FRANCIS W. PAGE et al.v.THE PEOPLE ex rel. Herman G. Weber, Collector, etc.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

99 Ill. 418

1881 WL 10560 (Ill.)

FRANCIS W. PAGE et al.

v.THE PEOPLE ex rel. Herman G. Weber, Collector, etc.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Filed at Mt. Vernon Jun. 21, 1881.

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

WRIT OF ERROR to the County Court of St. Clair county; the Hon. FREDERICK H. PIEPER, Judge, presiding.

Application for judgment against delinquent lands and lots of plaintiffs in error was made by Herman G. Weber, collector of St. Clair county, for the taxes due the city of East St. Louis for the year 1876, which taxes were extended at the rate of 22 mills upon the dollar of the assessed valuation of the property.

Plaintiffs in error filed objections to the entry of judgment against said lands and lots, the second whereof is: “The per centum of taxation against said property for city purposes, as shown herein, is in excess of the per centum allowed to be assessed and levied by the charter of said city and the laws of the State.”

Proof of advertisement of delinquent list and certificate of publishers to same was given in evidence. Plaintiffs in error then gave in evidence proof to the effect that the equalized valuation of the taxable property within the corporate limits of the city of East St. Louis, for the year 1876, was $4,408,305; also, an ordinance making the annual appropriations for the current fiscal year, and providing for the levy and collection of a tax therefor, as follows:

“ Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of East St. Louis:

SECTION 1. That there be and hereby is appropriated, to be provided for by the general tax levy for the current fiscal year, the aggregate sum of ninety-six thousand eight hundred and thirty-two dollars and twelve cents, for the following purposes, to-wit: (specifying the different corporate purposes, and the amount appropriated to each).

Sec. 2. That there be levied and collected upon the assessed value of all property, real and personal, within the jurisdiction of the city, the sum of ninety-six thousand eight hundred and thirty-two dollars and twelve cents, as the aggregate of the several amounts required to be raised by taxation for use of the city, as the general tax levy for the current fiscal year, (A. D. 1876,) to be extended by the county clerk of St. Clair county on the assessed valuation of the property aforesaid, as equalized and assessed by the State Board of Equalization, and in accordance with the general Revenue law of the State.

Sec. 3. That the city clerk, immediately upon the passage, etc., of this ordinance, certify to the county clerk the said several amounts and aggregate amount required to be raised by taxation for the use of the city, as required by sec. 122, chap. 120, of the Revised Statutes of 1874.”

Proof was made that this ordinance was duly published, and also that the tax levied by the ordinance was properly certified to the county court. Judgment was rendered as asked by the collector.

Plaintiffs in error assign for error:

First--The court erred in rendering judgment for more than 13 mills on the dollar of the equalized valuation of property of plaintiffs in error.

Second--The court erred in rendering judgment for 14 mills on the dollar, and in not rendering judgment for 10 mills on the dollar, of the equalized valuation of the property of the plaintiffs in error.

The People file the following pleas in this court, omitting the caption:

“And now come the said people on the relation aforesaid, by J. M. Freels, their attorney, and defend the wrong and injury, when, etc., and pray judgment of the said writ, and say that the plaintiffs in error ought not to have their aforesaid writ and action against them, the defendants aforesaid, because they say that they, the said people, on the relation aforesaid, heretofore impleaded the said plaintiffs, as required by law, in the county court of St. Clair county, in the county of St. Clair, and State of Illinois, to the August term, 1877, of said county court, in a certain application for judgment against the lots and tracts of land of plaintiffs, therein described, for judgment, for the city taxes of the city of East St. Louis, for the year 1876, before and then due and delinquent thereon; which said taxes amounted to twenty-two mills on the dollar of the equalized assessed value of said property, and are the same taxes named and described in the record now before this court in this cause, and none other, and which said taxes plaintiffs in error had refused and still refuse to pay, and then and there came into court and filed written objections to the validity of said taxes, and the right of the court to render judgment for the same, which objections were and are the same named and set out in said record; that on the 23d day of August, 1877, at said term of said court in said county, said court, after a full hearing of the law, and the evidence adduced by the respective parties herein, then and there rendered judgment in favor of the said people, on the relation aforesaid, against the said lots and lands of plaintiffs, 14/22 of the said city taxes, which are the same judgment and cause of action set out in the record in this cause, and none other, to which ruling and judgment for 14/22 of said city taxes plaintiffs in error took no exceptions; but the people, on the relation aforesaid, then and there excepted to said judgment, because it was not for the whole of said city taxes instead of 14/22 thereof, and refused judgment as to 8/22 of the said city taxes; to which refusal to give judgment for 8/22 of said city taxes the people, on the relation aforesaid, then and there excepted; and the court gave the people, on the relation aforesaid, sixty days to file a bill of exceptions, which they did on the 19th day of October, 1877,--which said bill is the same bill of exceptions set out in the record in this cause,-- and removed the said cause by writ of error into the Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District; which said Appellate Court, under the law then in force, had jurisdiction in all such cases, and from which court process issued in said cause, and was duly served upon plaintiffs in error (then defendants), to appear before said court, as required by law; that at the February term, A. D. 1879, of said Appellate Court, the plaintiffs in error now, who were then defendants in error, appeared, filed briefs and joined in error, but did not assign any cross-errors, and on the 25th day of March, 1879, at said term, in said Appellate Court, the said cause came on to be heard, and the court having examined and inspected the record and proceedings aforesaid, and the matters and things therein assigned for error, found no error whatever, and ordered and adjudged that the judgment aforesaid be affirmed in all things, and stand in full force and...