Kreigh v. City of Chicago

Citations

• 86 Ill. 407

Syllabus

<p>1. Municipal corporation—power over streets. A city holds its streets in trust for the public, and has no power to alienate them to others or divest itself of control over them, by conferring rights therein inconsistent with its duty to the public to keep them open and improve them for use as streets.</p> <p>2. Sams—surrender of control over streets. The power to establish and open streets, and to improve and repair the same, being vital to the well-being of municipal coporations, it will never be presumed that the Legislature, having invested them with this power, has at the same time authorized them to surrender it to others, over whose acts they can exercise no control.</p> <p>3. Statute construed—relating to parks. The 38th section of chapter 105 of the Revised Statutes of 1874, entitled “Parks,” authorizing the connecting contiguous parks by boulevards or pleasure-ways, and putting such boulevards or pleasure-ways under the control of park commissioners, the same as other public grounds established by them, has no reference to prior established streets, and does not authorize the park commissioners to purchase or acquire established streets, or the city authorities to surrender control over them.</p> <p>4. Streets —effect of ordinance giving park commissioners control of street. The city of Chicago having no authority to divest itself of control over its streets, an ordinance setting apart a street for a pleasure-way, under the law relating to parks, and attempting to give the park commissioners control over the same, may he regarded as a license protecting such commissioners and those acting under them from prosecution for interfering with such street, hut not as divesting the city of its power and relieving it of its duty to widen and improve the same as the public necessity may require.</p>