Skip to main content
· 9/15/1870

Dunnovan v. Green

Citations

  • 57 Ill. 63

Syllabus

<p>1. Railroad election—-for subscriptioiv—registry of voters. At an election in a township for and against subscribing stock to a rail road company, under the charter which does not require a registry of the voters, the registry law of 1865 does not apply to such an election, the presumption being that this should be held like other township elections. But if a registry was required, the court does not hold, that its omission would avoid bonds in the hands of innocent holders.</p> <p>2. Election—majority of the voters of the town—majority cast. Where the charter authorizing the election, provides that when a majority of the votes shall be for subscription, it shall be made, it refers to a majority of the votes cast, and not a majority of the voters residing in the township.</p> <p>3. Tax—levied by auditor—excessive. Where it appears that the Auditor of Public Accounts has levied a larger sum than is necessary for the payment of the annual interest on bonds registered in his office, under a specified election, and there is no allegation that no other bonds of the town are so registered in the auditor’s office, the. court will not presume the levy is excessive; that must be shown.</p> <p>4. Auditor—power to levy tax—constitution. The act of the 16tli of April, 1869, making it the duty of the Auditor of Public Accounts to ascertain the amount of interest that will accrue on town and other bonds registered in his office, and certify the amount to the county cleric, to be by him extended on the collector’s books, and collected in the manner State revenue is collected, is not violative of sec. 5, art. 9, of the constitution of 1848. The last clause of that section vests the legislature with the power to require all property of individuals in the corporate limits, to be taxed for the payment of debts contracted under authority of law. The first-clause is a limitation on the power of the general assembly’to levy a tax or create a corporate debt, or to authorize others to d

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • noting that when legislative intent is ascertained, “it will prevail over the literal import and the strict letter of the statute”
  • noting that when legislative intent is ascertained, \it will prevail over the literal import and the strict letter of the statute\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Walker

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.