People Ex Rel. John C. Richberg v. the Trustees of Sch. T. 39 N.

• Decision Date: 30 September 1877
• Citation: 1877 WL 9787,86 Ill. 613
• Parties: THE PEOPLE ex rel. John C. Richbergv.THE TRUSTEES OF SCHOOLS T. 39 N., R. 13 E.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

86 Ill. 613

1877 WL 9787 (Ill.)

THE PEOPLE ex rel. John C. Richberg

v.THE TRUSTEES OF SCHOOLS T. 39 N., R. 13 E.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

September Term, 1877.

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. JOSEPH E. GARY, Judge, presiding.

Mr. W. W. PERKINS, for the appellant.

Messrs. TULEY, STILES & LEWIS, for the appellees.

Mr. JUSTICE BREESE delivered the opinion of the Court:

This was a petition to the Superior Court of Cook County, by the people, on the relation of John Richberg, claiming to be a resident, legal voter, and tax payer of the city of Chicago, and president of the Board of Education of that city, praying, on allegations therein contained, that a mandamus issue against the trustees of schools of township 39 north, range 13 east, to compel them to apportion and place to the credit of the city for the use of the inhabitants of that portion of congressional township 39 north, 13 east, lying within the city of Chicago, for the use of schools, such portion as the law prescribes of all the rents, profits, and interests arising from the 16th section in that township, subject to distribution for the maintenance of free schools in that township.

The allegation of the petition is, that by an act of the General Assembly, passed in 1869, the western limits of Chicago were extended west, so as to take in about two ranges of sections in township 39 north, range 13 east, leaving the greater portion of the township as it always was, and containing section sixteen. This section is admitted to be granted to the State, for the use of schools, and it is alleged, since the act of the Legislature above referred to, exclusive authority and jurisdiction have been exercised over this section by the school trustees of the dismembered township, without regard to the rights and claims of the residents upon that part of the township included in the city by the operation of the act of 1869.

There was a general demurrer to the petition, which was sustained, and judgment rendered against the relator, to reverse which he appeals.

We are of opinion the demurrer was properly sustained, there being nothing in the allegations of the petition demanding this writ. The relator has no vested right in the school fund of township 39 north, range 13 east, and is, therefore, in no position to ask for this writ. The People v. Hatch, 33 Ill. 140, and other cases. The principle is, the party praying the writ must show a clear right to it.

The question...