People ex rel. Henry v. New York Cent. R.R. Lines
| Decision Date | 15 January 1943 |
| Docket Number | No. 26891.,26891. |
| Citation | 45 N.E.2d 860,381 Ill. 490 |
| Parties | PEOPLE ex rel. HENRY v. NEW YORK CENT. R. R. LINES. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Proceeding by the People, on the relation of Alva S. Henry, County Collector, against the New York Central Railroad Lines.From a judgment of the County Court overruling defendant's objection to a part of the taxes for the year 1940 levied by School District, the defendant appeals.
Reversed and remanded, with directions.Appeal from Macoupin County Court; W. P. Cuthbertson, Judge.
Samuel W. Baxter and Thomas A. Mc-Cormack, both of Cincinnati, Ohio, and Jesse Peebles, of Carlinville, for appellant.
John P. Madden, State's Atty. of Gillespie (Murphy & Murphy, of Rock Island, of counsel), for appellee.
This is an appeal from the judgment of the county court of Macoupin county overruling the objections of appellant to a part of the taxes for the year 1940 levied by School DistrictNo. 164.The objections of appellant state that in this district a rate of $2 had been extended for educational purposes, a rate of 65¢ for building bonds, and a rate of 10¢ for building purposes; that the authority for the increased rates is supposed to be the result of an election held in October, 1938; and that appellant objects to $1 of the rate extended for educational purposes and 37 1/2¢ for building purposes in said school district, on the ground that the record of said district did not show that the essential steps required by the statute were taken in calling, holding, and ascertaining the result of said election, and on the further ground that the ballot voted at said election did not conform to the requirements of section 16 of the Ballot Law (Ill.Rev.Stat.1941, chap. 46, par. 305), and the election was void for that reason.
In opposition to appellant's claim that the election was void because the form of the ballot did not comply with the requirements of section 16 of the Ballot Law, appellee contends that this section has never applied to school elections similar to the one in question, and that inasmuch as section 189 of the School Law (Ill.Rev.Stat.1941, chap. 122, par. 212) which authorizes the calling of the election, does not prescribe the form of the ballot, conformity to section 16 of the Ballot Law is not required, and the board of education had the right to submit the ballot in such form as they saw fit, the only requirement being that the propositions voted upon be submitted in such form that the voters would not be misled and could readily understand what they were being called to vote upon.This court has recently held, in the case of People ex rel. Toman v. Chicago Great Western Railroad Co., 379 Ill. 594, at page 598 of the opinion, 41 N.E.2d 960, that inasmuch as section 189 of the School Law does not provide a form of ballot to be used in elections authorizing an increase in tax rates, section 16 of the Ballot Law governs the form in which the propositions are to be submitted to a vote of the people.This section provides that whenever a public measure is submitted to be voted upon by the people of any district the substance of the measure shall be clearly indicated on a separate ballot, and two spaces shall be left upon the right-hand margin thereof, one for the votes favoring the measure to be designated by the word ‘yes,’ and one for the votes opposing the measure, to be designated by the word ‘no,’ as in the form set forth in the statute.The ballot voted in the election of October 22, 1938, was in the following form:
Official Ballot
(The voter will place a cross-mark in the square opposite and following the proposition that indicates his choice.)
As readily appears, this ballot did not conform to the requirements of section 16 of the Ballot Law.It did not submit either of the propositions voted upon in the form prescribed by that section, which is:
+----------------------------+
¦Shall (here print the ¦Yes¦
+------------------------+---¦
¦substance of the public ¦ ¦
+------------------------+---¦
¦measure). ¦No ¦
+----------------------------+
It did not have two spaces upon the right-hand margin of each proposition submitted, one for the votes favoring the proposition, designated by the word ‘yes,’ and one for the votes opposing the proposition, designated by the word ‘no.’
This court has repeatedly held that the form of the ballot must conform to the statutory mandate, and a failure to observe such provision of the law is a matter of substance and renders the election void.People ex rel. Sandberg v. Grabs, 373 Ill. 423, 430, 26 N.E.2d 494;People ex rel. Hudson v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Ry. Co., 360 Ill. 180, 195 N.E. 631;People ex rel. Woods v. Myers, 256 Ill. 529, 532, 100 N.E. 211.In the case of People ex rel. Wangelin v. Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern Railroad Co., 372 Ill. 38, 45, 22 N.E.2d 699we held to be valid and sufficient a ballot levying a county tuberculosis sanitarium tax in addition to the statutory limit, which was substantially in the form prescribed by section 27 of the Counties Act and the County Tuberculosis Sanitarium Act, the wording of the ballot being the same in meaning, although not in the exact language used in the statute.Also in the case of People ex rel. Howard v. Chicago &...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 7-day Trial
-
People ex rel. Rhodes v. Miller, 29076.
...rates. People ex rel. De Rosa v. Chicago and North Western Railway Co. 391 Ill. 145, 62 N.E.2d 460;People ex rel. Henry v. New York Central Railroad Lines, 381 Ill. 490, 45 N.E.2d 860. Appellants' original brief and argument in this court is devoted exclusively to their contention that the ......
-
People ex rel. Lauth v. Wilmington Coal Co.
...N.E.2d 869;Peaple ex rel. De Rosa v. Chicago & North Western Railway Co., 391 Ill. 145, 62 N.E.2d 460;People ex rel. Henry v. New York Central Railroad Lines, 381 Ill. 490, 45 N.E.2d 860;People ex rel Toman v. Chicago Great Western Railroad Co., 379 Ill. 594, 41 N.E.2d 960. The special elec......
-
People ex rel. Hutchcraft v. Louisville & N.R. Co.
...186, 30 N.E.2d 743;People ex rel. Hempen v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co., 379 Ill. 543, 42 N.E.2d 69;People ex rel. Henry v. New York Central Railroad Lines, 381 Ill. 490, 45 N.E.2d 860. Apparently desiring to remedy that situation, the legislature amended section 189 in 1941, in order tha......
-
Hare v. Canvassing Bd. of Berwyn Tp.
...to observe the statutory requirements is a matter of substance which renders an election void. (People ex rel. Henry v. New York Central Railroad Lines (1942), 381 Ill. 490, 45 N.E.2d 860.) The statute governing the form of ballots for general elections in Illinois provides as "The names of......