The Cairo daily bulletin. (Cairo, Ill.) 1870-1872, 1871-06-17

held, that where party is compelled b,
for which he Is not liable. tho payment /
not voluntary but compulsory. and thai
he may rescue himself from sucl
duress by payment of tho money anC
afterwards on proof of the fact rccovo
1t back, do not apply 10 the case of real
estate threatened with such action as in
the present case. And wo think the nav.
ment Of these assessments was not made
under such circumstances of constraint nd
compulsion as to except it from the oper.
alton of the legal principle, TIA,
II party with full knowledge
of all the facts of tho case, voluntsrily
pays money lin ! satisfaction IN
discharge of a demand unjustly made on
him, he can not Afterwards recover back
the money. 'f"i' ~ '"
As TO the tiiirl point, the reason does
not appear why the collection Of the other
assessments was ubaadoned. If they we're
illegal and void as claimed, we may pre-
sumo 1t to have been because they we're not
paid voluntarily and the city could not
But the imRfSysthent was not aban.
doned it was Completed, and the money
paid by the plaintiff was not retained by
the city, but it was applied towards the
expense of the improvements ~, r. n
The plaintiff has but paid the amount
of the special benefit which his property
derived from the improvement.
1t was equitable that he should do so
the circumstance that others failed 10
make payments for their special benefits.
does not vary the case. 1t does not ap-
pear to us, to be contrary to equity and
good concience for the city to retain
TINS money, and apply 1t in relief of the
general property owners from the pay
ment for special benefit conferred upon
the plaintiff alone.
As to the consideration for the paw
mcnt having wholly failed, the improve
ment having been made, II is to be con-
sidered that the plaintiff has received a
iull equivalent or compensation for the
money paid, in the enhanced value which
his property has derived from the i'm
r1vemcnt. Canal Trustees. et a.. rs.
the city of Chicago, ~, III. 400, Sharp rs.
Speir 4, Hill 76)
In Bradford rs. the City of Chicago.
supra; the cases of the Bank OF New
Orleans as. the city of New Orleans. ~ |
Louisiana, X. AL; the city of Louisville
rs. Lahore, ! Nit. (Ky.) l5l; and Walker
rs. city of st. Louis, were cited, which de-
eide that where an illegal special Assess
ment for special benefits has been volunta-
rily paid it is not recoverable back, on the
ground that consideration was received
for the money paid, in the special benefit
conferred by the Improvement, and one so
benefited was not in good conscience en-
titled to recover back again the money
paid.
The case Of Bradford VS.. the city OF
Chicago, supra, is distinguished from the
present one, not only by the fact that
there the collector had in his hands war
rant against the goods ard chattles Of the
plaintiff at the time the payment was
made, but the contemplated improvement
was not made, but was abandoned +; so that
he consideration for the payment had
wholly failed.
The judgment Of the Court below hav-
ng been for the defendant it must not he
affirmed. Judgment affirmed.
'taie OF illii o =, Supreme Court, Central Grand
DIVISION.
], William A. Turney, Clerk Of SAID ST. |
,rcme Court, do hereby certify that the
oregoing is a true copy Of the opinion Of
aid Court in said cause ~ the same APP |
,ears Of record in my Office
In testimony whereof | hereunto |
L. 8. set my hand and aflix the seal of |
said Court, at Springfield, this Nth |
day Of june, A. D., 1871.
WIN. a. TURNEY.