Melvin v. Lisenby

Citations

• 72 Ill. 63

Syllabus

<p>1. Elections — votes cast supposed to be all the legal votes. The presumption is, that the vote cast at an election held according to law, is the vote of the whole number of legal voters, and this presumption can not he rebutted b)* proof of the number of votes cast at an election held iq the preceding year.</p> <p>2. Municipal bonds—when they may be registered in the Auditor's office, under the Funding Act of April 16, 1869. Under a law authorizing a county to subscribe to the stock of a railroad company, upon condition that a majority of the votes cast at an election on the question should be in favor of it, an election was held resulting in a majorit)rin favor of the subscription, and the subscription was made and bonds issued: Held, that the bonds were rightfully registered in the Auditor’s office under the Funding Act of April 16, 1869, which requires that the subscription upon which bonds sought to be registered were issued, should have been voted for by a majority of the legal voters living in the county, it being the presumption that the vote oast at the election on the question of subscription, was that of all the voters of the county.</p> <p>8. Same—not void, by reason of defective execution. Where bonds of a county are legally authorized to be issued by a vote of the people, and by the law authorizing the vote it is provided that the bonds shall be executed by certain officers, and countersigned by the treasurer of the county, it was held, that the omission of the treasurer to countersign the bonds is a mere defect in the execution of them, which a court of equity would, in the absence of a remedy at law, ordinarily supply, and that an injunction restraining the collection of taxes for the payment of such bonds should not be allowed.</p>