Washingtonian Home of Chicago v. City of Chicago
Decision Date | 11 October 1895 |
Citation | 157 Ill. 414,41 N.E. 893 |
Parties | WASHINGTONIAN HOME OF CHICAGO v. CITY OF CHICAGO. |
Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from circuit court, Cook county; E. W. Burke, Judge.
Petition for mendamus by the Washingtonian Home of Chicago against the city of Chicago. A demurrer to the petition was sustained, and the petitioner appeals. Affirmed.
M. B. & F. S. Loomis, for appellant.
S. Zeisler, for appellee.
This was a petition for mandamus brought by the Washingtonian Home of Chicago against the city of Chicago to compel the city to pay to the petitioner $25,000,-10 per cent. of moneys received for licenses granted by the city for the right or privilege to sell spirituous liquors from January 1, 1893, to June 29, 1894. To the petition the city of Chicago interposed a general demurrer, which the court sustained, and the petition was dismissed. To reverse the judgment of the circuit court, petitioner appealed.
The petitioner is a corporation organized under an act of the legislature approved February 16, 1867. The act under which the petitioner was incorporated was set out in the petition, sections 1 and 2 of which are as follows:
‘Section 1. Be it enacted by the people of the state of Illinois, represented in the general assembly, that the Washingtonian Home Association of Chicago is hereby created and declared to be a body corporate and politic, under the name of ‘Washingtonian Home of Chicago,’ with power to sue and be sued, plead and be impleaded, contract and be contracted with; to take, by gift, grant, devise or otherwise, property, real, personal and mixed, and the same to hold, use, lease, convey, mortgage and otherwise dispose of, for the purposes hereinafter mentioned; to adopt and use a corporate seal, and alter the same at pleasure; also to erect and maintain such buildings and other fixtures and conveniences as may be deemed requisite or necessary for the purposes of this corporation.
Section 3 authorized the corporation to adopt such by-laws for the management of the institution as it thought proper.
Sections 4 and 5 of the act are as follows:
Section 7 provides:
Section 7 was amended by an act in force July 1, 1883, providing that in no case shall the sum so paid for or during any one year exceed $20,000.
It is alleged in the petition that, immediately after the act went into effect, petitioner perfected its organization, and at once proceeded to carry out the objects of its incorporation, and has continued its organization and continued to carry out the objects of its organization; that, since its organization up to the present time, petitioner has cared for and treated in its said institution not less than 18,000 inebriates, large numbers of whom have, by reason of such care and treatment, been cured and reclaimed from their unfortunate habits of drunkenness and inebriety. And petitioner avers that, of the above number of inebriates so cared for and treated by petitioner as aforesaid, a large number, to wit, about 3,865 thereof, were persons sentenced by the authorities of said city of Chicago to the Bridewell or House of Correction of said city, for intemperance, drunkenness, or for misdemeanors caused thereby, who, with the consent of the proper authorities of said Home, were received and maintained as inmates of the home in lieu of the Bridewell until the expiration of such sentence. It is also alleged in the petition:
It is claimed on behalf of the city of Chicago that section 7 of the act of 1867, which requires the city to pay to the Home 10 per cent. of all moneys received for licenses to sell spirituous liquors, and the amendatory act of 1883, whereby the amount was limited to $20,000 per annum, are unconstitutional and void; that the section and amendment violate that clause of the constitution of 1870 which reads as follows: ‘No county, city, town, township or other municipality shall ever become subscriber to the capital stock of any railroad or private corporation, make donation to, or loan its credit in aid of such corporation: Provided however, that the adoption of his article shall not be construed as affecting the right of any such municipality to make such subscriptions where the same had been authorized, under existing laws, by a vote of the people of such municipalities prior to such adoption.’ Article 14. It will be observed that this provision of the constitution prohibits cities and other municipal corporations from making donations or loaning their credit in aid of any private corporation; and the first question to be considered is whether the Washingtonian Home is a private corporation, within the meaning of the constitution. As has been seen, the second section of the act creating the Home declares the object of the corporation to be the founding and maintenance of an institution for the care, cure, and reclamation of inebriates. The charter contains nothing prohibiting the corporation from making such charges for the care or cure of patients as it may think best; but, on the other hand, section 3 confers the power to adopt such by-laws as it may think proper for the management of its business. The charter does not specify who the incorporators shall be, but the first section of the charter declares the Washingtonian Home Association of Chicago to be a body corporate and politic. Who constituted the association or what was the qualification of members when it was created a corporation is not disclosed by this record. Section 4 provides for the selection of 30 directors by lot, 15 to hold office until the third Monday of January, 1869, and the remainder until the third Monday of January, 1871; but the act is silent as to who shall elect the first board of directors. The act nowhere prescribes how any person can become a member of the corporation, nor is there any provision in regard to the salary of officers or directors. So far as appears, the persons who composed the Washingtonian Home Association of Chicago when this act was framed were clothed with corporate power, under which they might transact the business mentioned in the act for their own private benefit. At all events, no state control over the institution is provided for, nor has Chicago or Cook county any voice in its control or management. The corporation has the right to acquire and hold property, both real and personal; but the state has no voice in the management or control of the property thus acquired, or in the mode or manner in which the institution shall be managed or conducted. The act makes no provision for any report to be made by the institution to the state or any of its officials. Indeed, no provision whatever is made for an inspection or visitation of the institution by the state or any of its officers, but the entire supervision and control seems, under the charter, to...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State ex rel. Ins. Agents' Assn. v. Kansas City
...241; R.S. 1919, sec. 2164; 1 Dillon on Mun. Corp., sec. 244; 1 McQuillin on Mun. Corp., sec. 382; Egan v. City, 133 Pac. 294; Home v. Chicago, 41 N.E. 893; Farmer v. St. Paul, 67 N.W. 990; Fox v. Mohawk, 59 N.E. 353; Cemetery v. Boston, 33 N.W. 695; 19 R.C.L. 717. (2) The ordinance does not......
-
Robinson Twp. v. Pa. Pub. Util. Comm'n
...these relationships; the amendment does so by its own Ipse dixit.”). This view is not an outlier. Washingtonian Home of Chicago v. City of Chicago, 157 Ill. 414, 41 N.E. 893, 896 (1895) ( “[W]here [constitutional] provisions are negative or prohibitory in their character, they execute thems......
-
State ex rel. Kansas City Ins. Agent's Ass'n v. Kansas City
...Mass. 241; R. S. 1919, sec. 2164; 1 Dillon on Mun. Corp., sec. 244; 1 McQuillin on Mun. Corp., sec. 382; Egan v. City, 133 P. 294; Home v. Chicago, 41 N.E. 893; Farmer St. Paul, 67 N.W. 990; Fox v. Mohawk, 59 N.E. 353; Cemetery v. Boston, 33 N.W. 695; 19 R. C. L. 717. (2) The ordinance does......
-
Buchanan v. Kennard
... ... Appeal ... from St. Louis City Circuit Court. -- Hon. Eugene McQuillin, ... Holifield, 79 ... Ala. 423; Troutman v. Orphans' Home, 66 Kas. 1; ... Hilliard v. Miller, 10 Pa. St. 326; ... Phillips v. Railroad, 211 Mo. 419; Washingtonian ... Home v. Chicago, 157 Ill. 414; State ex rel. v ... ...