Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Chamberlain

Citations

• 84 Ill. 333

Syllabus

<p>1. Right of way—proceedings to condemn, under aet of 1852—whether the termini of a railroad are fixed. By one of the acts under which the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy Railroad Company was incorporated, the line of the road is designated: “Prom Aurora to some eligible and convenient point in the county of Du Page, there to connect with the Galena and Chicago Union railroad.” By an amendatory act, the company was authorized to construct a branch railroad from its main line, from Aurora, in Kane county, to and in the city of Chicago, by the way of Naperville. It was held, that, under either of these acts, the termini of the road were so far fixed as to authorize the company to proceed to condemn land for its use, under the act of 1852, which is confined, in its operation, to railroads the termini of which have been fixed by the legislature.</p> <p>2. Same—of the petition—as to whether the company could procure the right of way by purchase. In a proceeding by a railway company, under the right of way act of 1852, the petition alleged that the company “ has not been able to acquire the title to said several tracts, etc., from the persons interested therein, by voluntary grant or otherwise.” This was held to be a sufficient averment that the title to the land sought to he condemned could not he acquired by purchase.</p> <p>3. Same — notice of application for appointment of commissioners — whether acted upon. The notice given in this case was, that application would be made by the company to the judge of the circuit court, at hi's chambers, at 10 o’clock A. M. oa the 36th day of February, 1864. The petition was filed in the office of the clerk of the circuit court on the 28th of January, 1864. The record of the circuit court showed that, on the 26th day of February, 1864, which was a day of the February term of that court, the petitioner filed in the court the notice, with proof of its publication. On the same day, one of the defendants filed his motion, in writing, t