People v. Salomon

• Decision Date: 31 January 1870
• Citation: 54 Ill. 39,1870 WL 6255
• Parties: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, ex rel.THE ATTORNEY GENERAL,v.EDWARD S. SALOMON.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

54 Ill. 39

1870 WL 6255 (Ill.)

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, ex rel.THE ATTORNEY GENERAL,

v.EDWARD S. SALOMON.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

January Term, 1870.

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

This was a proceeding by attachment, in the name of the people, on the relation of the attorney general, against Edward S. Salomon, for an alleged contempt, in failing to obey the command of a peremptory writ of mandamus awarded by this court in the case of The People, on the relation of O. H. Miner, Auditor of Public Accounts, against Edward S. Salomon, Clerk of the County Court of Cook County, 46 Ill. 333, directing the said Salomon, as such clerk, to extend the taxes on the collectors' books, in Cook county, according to the increased valuation fixed by the State board of equalization.

The respondent was brought before the court, upon the writ of attachment, and made answer to interrogatories propounded to him by the attorney general, touching his alleged disobedience to the peremptory mandamus.

Mr. WASHINGTON BUSHNELL, Attorney General, for the people.

Mr. S. A. IRVIN, for the respondent.

The judgment of the Court was delivered by Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE BREESE:

Edward S. Salomon:

On the fourteenth of October, 1867, the Auditor of Public Accounts of this State, in obedience to law, gave you notice, under his official seal, you then being the clerk of the county court of Cook county, that the State board of equalization had raised the assessed value of property in that county for the purposes of taxation, twenty-four per cent, and that it would be your duty, as such clerk, to extend the taxes on the collectors' books, according to such increased valuation. This you declined to do, on the assumed ground that the equalization law was unconstitutional, and, at the January term, 1868, of this court, the auditor applied to this court for a mandamus commanding you to extend this tax. To the alternative writ you made a return, setting up the unconstitutionality of the law as a reason for not obeying it, but not disclosing the fact that the tax books had already been delivered by you to the township collectors. The case was heard by this court, on your return to the writ, and argued by able counsel, when, on the tenth of February, 1868, a peremptory mandamus was awarded, this court holding the equalization act to be constitutional.

At the present term of this court, the attorney general, in the performance of his duty, filed an information, giving this court to be informed that you had not obeyed the peremptory mandamus. Upon this information, this court did not hesitate to award an attachment for this, your alleged contempt, and being brought before this court thereon, that officer filed a series of interrogatories, to which you have responded under oath.

The attorney general admits your answers to be true, and we regard them as true, for the purposes of this proceeding.

We do not deem it necessary to pronounce, in detail, upon all the items of your several answers to the interrogatories. Your answer to the second interrogatory, considered with the others, disclaiming all intentional disrespect to the mandate of this court, embody your defense to this proceeding, the substance of which answer is, that so soon as the peremptory mandamus was served upon you, on the eleventh of February, 1868, you obtained the advice of eminent counsel, the tenor of which was that you should, forthwith, demand of the several collectors a return of the tax books, then in their possession, so that you might make thereon the extension as commanded by the writ; that you ascertained, on application to the county treasurer, that the collectors of the twenty-eight towns outside of Chicago had returned their books to him; that you demanded of the treasurer the books, that you might comply with the order of this court, and that he refused to deliver the books to you, giving as a reason that the law required him to retain possession of the books for the purpose of collecting the taxes then remaining unpaid, and for making out his delinquent list, and for making application to the proper court for judgment upon it, and that he could not return the books until after the tax sale in the month of September following; that you called upon the collectors of the towns of North, South and West Chicago, informing them you had received the writ of mandamus, and demanded of them their books, for the purpose of extending upon them the additional twenty-four per cent, and that they severally refused to deliver the books to you, giving as a reason for such refusal, that the warrants attached to the books required them to collect the taxes as thereon extended, and to make return of the books to the county treasurer by the fifteenth of May following, and also, that they had given heavy bonds for the performance of that duty; that you suggested to the auditor, on informing him of these facts, that as a means of overcoming the difficulties in the way, the best course would be to extend this additional tax on the books of 1868 as “back tax,” to which the auditor did not assent; that upon learning this non-assent of the auditor, you proposed to the chairman of the board of supervisors the propriety and necessity of making out new books, extending on them this additional tax, and that the chairman informed you that it was necessary, as he understood the law, that he should sign the warrants attached to such books as chairman of the board of supervisors, in order to their validity, and that he would not sign such warrants if you did make up new books, and that thereupon you again consulted your legal adviser, and he informed you that if the chairman of the board refused to sign the warrants attached to the proposed new books, they would be illegal and useless, and that he had grave doubts whether, if the chairman should sign such warrants, they would be valid; as he understood the command of the writ of mandamus, it was, that the additional...