Larrison v. Peoria, Atlanta & Decatur Railroad

Citations

• 77 Ill. 11

Syllabus

<p>1. Chancery practice—as to answer of corporation. Although it is more regular to require a corporation to answer under seal, yet, where answer under oath is dispensed with, and a railroad company, which is merely a nominal party, answers without seal, and the court below refuses to strike the answer from the files, this court will not reverse for that cause alone, especially where it appears that the same defense was set up by others, and the result was the same as if the company had been defaulted.</p> <p>2. Same—answer of municipal corporation. The answer of a municipal corporation to a bill in chancery need not be signed by an officer thereof. Where the name of the corporation is written to such an answer, and there is nothing to show that it is unauthorized, it will he sufficient.</p> <p>3. Constitutional law—presumption as to passage of laws. Where a law is signed by the Speakers of both houses, and approved by the Governor, it will be presumed to have been passed in conformity with all the requirements of the constitution, and that it is valid, until the presumption is overcome by legitimate proof, clear and convincing in its character.</p> <p>4. Same—sufficiency of proof to overcome such presumption. Where the journals of the Senate showed that Senate bill No. 453, for “An act to incorporate the Peoria, Atlanta and Danville Railroad Company,” was introduced, read a first and second time, and referred to a committee, and that the committee to whom was referred Senate bill No. 453, for “An act to incorporate the Peoria, Atlanta and Decatur Railroad Company,” reported back the same with amendments, and that the same was engrossed for a third reading, and finally passed upon the call of the ayes and noes: Held, that the proof failed to raise even a doubt of the passage of the bill, and that these entries failed to show that there were two bills pending of the same number, and that the number showed Us identity.</p>