People v. Tompkins

• Decision Date: 30 September 1874
• Citation: 1874 WL 9171,74 Ill. 482
• Parties: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOISv.WILLIAM F. TOMPKINS et al.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

74 Ill. 482

1874 WL 9171 (Ill.)

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

v.WILLIAM F. TOMPKINS et al.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

September Term, 1874.

WRIT OF ERROR to the Circuit Court of Cook county.

This was an action of debt by the People of the State of Illinois against William F. Tompkins, as grain inspector, and Aquilla H. Pickering, John B. Lyon, Wiley M. Egan, George H. Sidwell and David H. Lincoln, his sureties upon his official bond.

The following is a copy of the declaration, omitting the formal parts: “For that, whereas, the said Tompkins heretofore, to wit, on the 3d day of July, A. D. 1871, was duly appointed and commissioned by the then governor of said State of Illinois, by and with the advice and consent of the senate of said State, to the office of chief inspector of grain in and for the city of Chicago, in said Cook county, and that he, the said Tompkins, then and there accepted the said appointment and commission to said office, and entered upon the duties thereof; and that the said Tompkins as principal, and the said Pickering, Lyon, Egan, Sidwell and Lincoln as sureties, afterward, to wit, on the 31st day of July aforesaid, and upon the entering of him, the said Tompkins, upon the duties of said office, executed and delivered to the said plaintiffs, as the official bond of said Tompkins as such chief inspector, the bond hereinafter described; and that he, the said Tompkins, on the day and year last aforesaid, upon entering upon the duties of said office, took and subscribed in due form of law an oath of office as such chief inspector of grain; and that on the day and year last aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, the said defendants, by their writing obligatory, bearing date of that day, and sealed with their seals, did acknowledge themselves to be held and firmly bound to the said plaintiffs in the sum of $50,000, to be paid to said plaintiffs; which said writing obligatory was and is subject to a certain condition thereunder written, whereby, after reciting, to the extent that the said Tompkins had been appointed and duly commissioned chief inspector of grain for said city of Chicago, it was provided that if he, the said Tompkins, should faithfully and strictly discharge the duties of said office of chief inspector according to law and the rules and regulations prescribing his duties; and pay all damages to any person or persons who might be injured by reason of his neglect or failure to comply with the law and the rules and regulations aforesaid, then said writing obligatory was to be void, otherwise to be and remain in full force and effect, as by the said writing obligatory and by the said condition thereof appears.

And the said plaintiffs further complain and say that the said Tompkins, on the day and year last aforesaid, in said county, entered upon the discharge of the duties of said office, and continued to discharge the same up to and till the 8th day of April, A. D. 1873; and that, to wit, on the day and year last aforesaid, said Tompkins was lawfully removed from said office by the governor of said State, and one William H. Harper was then and there duly and lawfully appointed and commissioned to said office of chief inspector by the said last-named governor in place and instead of said Tompkins; and that the said Tompkins then and there surrendered the said office of chief inspector to said Harper as his successor, and ceased to act as such chief inspector; and that the said Harper then and there entered upon the duties of said office as he lawfully might, and has ever since continued to be and act as such successor to the said Tompkins.

"And the plaintiffs aver that before the performance of the acts and commission of the grievances hereinafter mentioned, to wit, on the 2d day of August, A. D. 1871, and from time to time subsequently thereto, the board of railroad and warehouse commissioners fixed and regulated the charges for the inspection of grain in such manner as would, in the judgment of said commissioners, produce sufficient revenue to meet the necessary expenses of the service of inspection, and no more; and, also, to wit, on the 2d day of August, A. D. 1871, fixed and regulated the manner in which such charges for inspection should be collected, in pursuance of the statute in such case made and provided; that is to say, the board of railroad and warehouse commissioners then and there adopted certain rules and regulations whereby the said chief inspector of grain was authorized to collect such charges for the inspection of grain as might be established from time to time by the said commissioners, and therewith to pay for the services of all persons employed in such inspection service or department, monthly, together with such other additional expenses of office, rent, stationery, etc., as might be necessary, etc.

"And said plaintiffs further complain and say that it became and was the duty of said Tompkins, as such chief inspector of grain, during his continuance in said office, to faithfully, strictly and impartially inspect, or cause to be inspected, grain in the city of Chicago, and collect and receive the lawful fees for such inspection, in accordance with the rules and regulations of said board of railroad and warehouse commissioners; and that the said Tompkins did, during his continuance in said office of chief inspector, inspect or cause to be inspected large quantities of grain in said city of Chicago, and did then and there lawfully collect and receive as lawful fees for such inspection a large sum of money by virtue of said office of chief inspector; and that it was his duty, on his removal from said office as aforesaid, to deliver and pay over to the said Harper, the said successor of him, the said Tompkins, in office,...