Chestnutwood v. Hood

Citations

• 68 Ill. 132

Syllabus

<p>1. Municipal subscription'—right to enjoin. The right of a citizen and tax-payer of a county to maintain a bill in equity to restrain those who represent the corporate authority of the county from issuing its bonds without the sanction of law, can not at this day be seriously questioned.</p> <p>2. Same—statute authorizing, construed in respect to majority inf amor of. A statute authorizing a corporate subscription in aid of a railroad enterprise, provided that no subscription should be made or bonds issued unless a majority of all the legal voters of the county should vote for the same, at an election to be ordered, and declared that a majority of legal voters at any such election should be held as a majority of the legal voters. Under this statute, an election on the question of corporate subscription was ordered at the same time with the regular election of county officers, at which 3210 votes were cast. There were 1278 votes cast in favor of subscription, and 1275 against the same: Held, that a majority of those voting upon the question submitted was not sufficient to authorize the subscription, but that a majority of all those voting at the election should vote in favor of the same, was necessary.</p> <p>3. If a special election had been called upon the question of subscription, then it seems that the returns of the election officers of the votes on that question, under such a law, would govern.</p> <p>4. Construction op statutes—when a strict construction prevails. It is a well settled rule of construction, that statutes extending the powers of corporations, or increasing the burdens of taxation, must be strictly construed.</p>