Legal Opinion

City of Chicago v. Hardy

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided November 5, 1896PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Prosecution, for the violation of an ordinance. Appeal from the Criminal Court of Cook County; the Hon. Murray F. Tuley, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1896.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Waterman

The power granted to the city in respect to the occupation of appellee, is “ To license, regulate, tax and restrain runners for stages, cars, public houses, or other things or persons.” No. 43, Art. 5, Chap. 24, R. S.

This does not include a power to prohibit, the business being laudable and legitimate. Dillon on Municipal Corporations, Sec. 324; City of Chicago v. Rumpff, 45 Ill. 90; Schwuchow v. Chicago, 68 Ill. 444.

Courts adopt a strict rather than a liberal construction of powers to corporations, whether public or private. Dillon on Municipal Corporations, Sec. 91.

To solicit patronage for…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. City of Chicago v. RumpffIllinois Supreme Court · 1867
  2. Schwuchow v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court · 1873

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Naegle v. City of CentraliaAppellate Court of Illinois · 1899

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API