Baldwin v. City of Chicago

Citations

• 68 Ill. 418

Syllabus

<p>1. Ordinance—closing a saloon. The defendant was convicted for keeping open a bar room between ■ m i dn i glit and 5 o’clock A.M., in violation of an ordinance. It appeared that his main business was the keeping of a restaurant or eating house, and that he kept his place of business open after midnight, but did not sell any liquor after that hour, he having closed his bar by drawing a curtain around it before that hour: Held, that the conviction was proper.</p> <p>2. Appeal—by city in suit for violating ordinance. Where a city charter provided that appeals, etc., should be allowed and might be “taken from police justices in all cases, in the same manner as before other justices of the peace”: Held, inasmuch as a suit for the violation of an ordinance was a civil proceeding in form, and only quasi criminal in its character, the city, as well as the defendant, had the right of appeal.</p>