Ross v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R. R.

Citations

• 77 Ill. 127

Syllabus

<p>1. Statutb—whether amendatory of charter or- not. The act of February 9, 1854, entitled “An act to amend an act entitled ‘an act to incorporate the Macomb, Vermont, and Bath Railroad,’ approved February 11, 1853,” is not so far foreign to the object embraced by the act of February 11, 1853, as to authorize the court in holding it not to be an amendment of the last named act, and, therefore, void, as not being embraced in the purposes in the Governor’s call of the special session of 1854 of the legislature.</p> <p>3. Same—whether embracing more than one subject. The charter of a railway company will not be subject to the constitutional objection of embracing more than one subject from the fact that it authorizes the construction, etc., of one or more extensions of the principal line, in different directions. The charter of the Peoria and Hannibal Railway Company is not obnoxious to this objection, as the extensions authorized are not regarded as independent and distinct lines from the main road.</p> <p>3. Charter—whether change in, when accepted, will release a party from his obligation to the company. Where a party gave his obligation to convey to a railway company a right of way over his' laud, and the charter of the company was afterwards changed, and, by subsequent enactment, the company was authorized to divide its road into sections, and to let and construct any of them, which amendments were accepted by the company, and the party, being a stockholder and director of the companv, expressly approved such amendments, and acted under their authority, and authorized and approved acts done under the same: Held, that he w'as not only bound, by implication, as a stockholder, to the act of acceptance of the amendments, but also by his own acts as a director, in exercising the new powers conferred, and was equitably estopped from alleging that the corporation had ceased to be that to which he became obligated.</p> <p>4. Same—who may take advantage of a failure to com