Edwards v. People
Citations
- 88 Ill. 340
Syllabus
<p>q. Taxes and taxation—per cent certified to by Auditor, etc., may exceed amount of State tax appropriated. A tax levied for State purposes is not void, in whole or in part, for the reason that the rate per cent fixed by the Governor, Auditor and Treasurer, and certified by the Auditor, will produce a larger amount than is authorized by law to be levied. These officers may fix such rate per cent as, in their judgment, will produce the net amount required, after deducting commissions and probable losses in the collection of the revenue.</p> <p>2. Same—law in reference to State tax to be levied. While the constitution requires the legislature to provide for its appropriations and determine the amount of revenue to be raised for State purposes, it does not require it to fix the rate per cent to raise the required amount, and does not prohibit the legislature from assigning that duty to certain State officers.</p> <p>3. Same—statute repealed. The Revenue act of March 30, 1872, in connection with the amendment of May 3, 1873, worked a repeal of all prior conflicting laws, whether found in general laws or in special charters of cities and towns.</p> <p>4. Same—as to limit to municipal taxation. Section 122, of the Revenue act of 1873, does not repeal that part of the charter of the city of Springfield which prohibits the levy of a tax exceeding two and one-half per cent on the assessed valuation of property in the city.</p> <p>5. A general law, requiring a city to make return of the amount of taxes it requires to be levied to the county clerk of the county, anything in its charter to the contrary notwithstanding, does not work a repeal of a provision in its charter prohibiting the city from levying over a certain rate per cent for taxes, but the city is bound to obey both laws, there being no conflict between them.</p> <p>6. Same—constitutionality of the Revenue law. The fact that certain credits and deductions are allowed, in the assessment of personal property, under
Judges: Craig
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
11 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Reif v. BarrettIllinois Supreme Court· 1933-12-22· cited 137×
- People ex rel. Keeney v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court· 1894-10-29· cited 35×
- Union Trust Co. v. WeberIllinois Supreme Court· 1880-10-02· cited 24×
- Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern Railroad v. People ex rel. GastonIllinois Supreme Court· 1902-12-16· cited 13×
- Binkert v. JansenIllinois Supreme Court· 1880-01-15· cited 9×
- Chicago & Alton Railroad v. BaldridgeIllinois Supreme Court· 1898-12-21· cited 6×
- People v. CooperAppellate Court of Illinois· 1882-04-14· cited 5×
- Giliman v. TalleySupreme Court of Iowa· 1909-01-19· cited 4×
- State v. Ada CountyIdaho Supreme Court· 1900-09-06· cited 3×
- Chicago, Indianapolis & Western Railway Co. v. People ex rel. RandolphIllinois Supreme Court· 1905-02-21· cited 1×
- Edwards v. PeopleIllinois Circuit Court· 1878-01-15
Cites
3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
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.