Chicago & Alton Railroad v. Howard

Citations

• 38 Ill. 414

Syllabus

<p>1. Pleading—declaration—certainty required. In a qui tam action against a railroad company for failing to sound a whistle or ring a bell on approaching a crossing of a public highway, it is not enough to allege that the omission occurred on crossing “ a public highway” in a certain county The highway should be described by name, location or its termini, so the company would be apprised of the place where the alleged offense was committed.</p> <p>2. Parties—who may sue to recover the penalty against railroad companies for failing to sound a whistle or ring a, hell. In suing a railroad company to recover the penalty for a failure to sound a whistle or ring a bell as a train approaches the crossing of a public highway, it is not essential that the suit should be brought by the State's Attorney and in the name of the People ; but any informer may sue, in the common law mode, in his own name, as well as on behalf of the People.</p> <p>3. The 42d section of the act of November 5, 1849, provides that the penalty may be sued for by the district attorney, and in the name of the People ; the word may would unquestionably be construed to mean shall in all cases where the public, alone, have an interest, or where a duty is imposed upon a public officer; also, where the public or a private individual has a claim de jure, that the power shall be exercised.</p> <p>4. But under the 38th section of the same act a common informer may sue in his own name, as well as on behalf of the people, to recover this penalty. The right of the public to sue under the 42d section, and that of the informer under the 38th, depends upon which shall first commence the suit.</p>