People ex rel. Singer v. Illinois Cent. R. Co.

• Decision Date: 17 April 1940
• Docket Number: No. 25549.,25549.
• Citation: 373 Ill. 523,26 N.E.2d 840
• Parties: PEOPLE ex rel. SINGER, County Collector, v. ILLINOIS CENT. R. CO.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

373 Ill. 523

26 N.E.2d 840

PEOPLE ex rel. SINGER, County Collector,

v.ILLINOIS CENT. R. CO.

No. 25549.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

April 17, 1940.

Proceeding by the People, on the relation of Fred Singer, County Collector, against the Illinois Central Railroad Company for a judgment on road and bridge levies, wherein the Illinois Central Railroad Company filed objections. From an adverse judgment, the Illinois Central Railroad Company appeals.

Judgment affirmed.Appeal from Livingston County Court; Homer W. Hall, Judge.

Charles A. Helsell and R. C. Beckett, both of Chicago, and Adsit Thompson & Herr, of Pontiac (E. C. Craig and V. W. Foster, both of Chicago, of counsel), for appellant.

Hubert H. Edwards, State's Atty., of Pontiac (Clair Westervelt, of Fairbury, of counsel), for appellee.

GUNN, Justice.

Appellant filed objections in the county court of Livingston county to the collector's application for judgment on the road and bridge levies certified by the respective highway commissioners in ten separate townships in said county. The objections were overruled and appellant, having paid seventy-five per cent of the taxes under protest, appeals directly to this court as a question of revenue is involved.

Each of the ten towns involved has outstanding road bond issues authorized by section 112 of the Roads and Bridges act, Ill.Rev.Stat.1937, chap. 121, par. 120, and the county clerk has extended a tax in said towns for the purpose of paying interest and retiring the principal of said bonds in amounts varying from thirty-eight cents to eighty-two cents on each $100. Two of said towns, Belle Prairie and Oswego, also had outstanding bonds issued under section 61 of the Roads and Bridges act. Ill.Rev.Stat.1937, chap. 121, par. 67. It is conceded that the county clerk of Livingston county properly extended a rate sufficient to pay the principal and interest of the bonds as the same mature. This was mandatory under section 12 of article 9 of the constitution, Smith-Hurd Stats.

In addition to the foregoing taxes extended by the county clerk, the highway commissioners of the several towns filed a certificate of levy of twenty-five cents on the $100, or up to thirty-three cents if authorized in writing by the board of town auditors, under section 56 of the Roads and Bridges act. Ill.Rev.Stat.1937, chap. 121, par. 62. The sole objection made by appellant is that since the rate extended by the county clerk, in each instance, for the collection of a tax to pay principal and interest of outstanding bonds is in excess of the amount that the commissioners of highways may levy under section 56, supra, the latter levy is entirely void. The contention is made that no taxes can be raised under section 56, supra, if taxes extended by the county clerk to pay bonds and interest equal or exceed the amount authorized therein.

The Roads and Bridges law was re-written and codified in 1913, Ill.Rev.Stat.1937, c. 121, and section 1 provides: ‘That the laws relating to roads and bridges be and they hereby are codified, revised and amended, with articles, subdivisions, and sections entitled, numbered and to read as follows:’ Article 6 is designated: ‘Town And District Organization And Administration For Highway Purposes.’ This article is divided into eight subdivisions of which No. 3 is entitled ‘The Raising Of Revenue For Highway Purposes And The Application Thereof,’ and subdivision 8 is entitled ‘Gravel, Rock And Macadam-Hard Roads.’ The act nowhere authorizes the commissioners by their certificate to levy a tax except as provided in section 56, supra. Section 61 authorizes a special tax by a vote of the people, for road aid, when such purpose requires ‘a greater sum of money than is available to them by other means.’ Section 61 authorizes a special tax by a vote of the people, to pay for damages and right-of-way in addition to the money that may be levied under section 56, and section 108 authorizes a special tax for constructing and maintaining rock or hard roads by a vote of the people. Section 112 provides that a certain number of the freeholders may petition to hold an election to vote bonds for road purposes and, in case a majority of the legal voters are in favor of the bonds, the town clerk is required to certify the fact to the county clerk and it is the duty of the latter to extend, annually, against the property in said town, a tax sufficient to pay the interest on the bonds and for the principal each year, as they mature. The tax authorized to be levied by the commissioners under section 56 is for proper construction, maintenance and repair of roads and bridges and comes under subdivision 3 of article 6 and is designated ‘The Raising of Revenue for Highway Purposes and the Application Thereof.’ The special tax authorized to be raised under section 61 is authorized by an election called by the commissioners, and, as pointed out above, is only where it is for the purpose of aiding the State in constructing a State-wide system of durable hard-surfaced roads and requires ‘a greater sum of money than is available to them by other means.’ The election for borrowing money and issuing bonds (sec. 112, supra) is initiated by a petition of one-hundred freeholders and comes under subdivision 8 entitled: ‘Gravel, Rock And Macadam-Hard Roads' of article 6 above. Section 122 of the same subdivision provides that the commissioners and the county superintendent may cause a road to be built of earth when gravel, stone and other suitable materials cannot be obtained at a cost within the means available. Section 124 provides that the commissioner of highways shall receive the same compensation for his services ‘under this subdivision of this Act as for services under the common road law,’ and section 129 provides that surplus funds in the hands of the treasurer after the completion of any road ‘provided for under this subdivision of this act’ shall be turned over to the common road fund of said town.

Statutes must be reasonably construed, so as to be applied in a practical and common sense manner. People v. New York, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad Co., 353 Ill. 518, 187 N.E. 443;Friend v. Borrenpohl, 329 Ill. 528, 161 N.E. 110. Each word, clause or sentence must be given effect if possible, in order that no such word, clause or sentence may be deemed superfluous or void. People v. Flynn, 265 Ill. 414, 106 N.E. 961;Consumers' Co. v. Industrial Com. 364 Ill. 145, 4 N.E.2d 34, 107 A.L.R. 811;Winner v. Kadow, 373 Ill. 192, 25 N.E.2d 882.

It is apparent that the revision and codification of the Roads and Bridges law embraced a general scheme divided into several purposes, each of which was covered by a designation contained in the article or the subdivision, and one of the purposes disclosed is to provide a fund to be levied by the commissioners of highways for ordinary road purposes, and another to provide means by special taxation or the issuance of bonds, to be authorized by a vote of the people, to raise funds to...