, 1873-02-12

pose, hsso declared tho buaineBs carried on BY COM
gainant 10 10 nniaance, lavo caused employees Of
from tho village aud, that thoy Will succeed In Do.
damage 10 complainant con nness % 10y S aal bo resraned
by tho injunction Of Court.
ness which tho complainant carry on at
Hyde Park Is nuisance, as vol by tho common law,
IT, y yues 4 oq II the oy OF
which the coplanants olam tho right @ continue
a b .n sass sf 81 S. hs @
with. Tho defendants In substance atlmit that they
s5s s g' 1s 1n @ ssps sy b $
a : municipal corporation, Or village, and under
usr Sat It i s 1tsf dc ali n' ae
havo done or proposc to do In the premises. And 1t is
havo not conducted thoir buB[ness in q careful or
proper manner, 50 TINT their works may not 10 IN
sesaSary Th denied BY tho
care ind they admit 1t Is their dny 10 conduct their
works with al lrower care, 10 TINT really the whole
whether the comn1anants arc conducting their buai-
ness in proper manner, but whether they have
important questions involved, tho general anxiety
On tho ono hand ono of onr most prosperous and
promising suburban towns Ia conendng for ita right
main and grow with the growth of the city which sup
plies 1aaseEtal for It, WILL as they must and perhaps
gerng the hcalth Ii not the lives Of Tie inhabitans
s q HMh at
Lood and persons Interested In property thcro desire
70 see tho town successful In Its efforts ii that behalf
On the otlcr hand Bne the complainant, having ol
fained their chnrtor md having invested their money
and established toir busiueas aud back Of them The
tnd ony Practicable outlet and ucaas Of rSlef Which s
Will enable them to carry their business hero and
so oy W a fnS0 o Il
and other refuse animal NATTER already argc nud
/ appears I'll ths Eth IL the year 1865 wah1 Brothers h
manufacture Of glue frou. hoofa and other parts Of
business Of converting the olfal received from Tie
n9skers end irGm The city, Into IN agricultural for
sorh he oauhe hses I'll Ms was ten
be carried on, and tho business itaon was
is;stsd 1s;s;, xlas!ss:;;s @ and sssyy KY
snd operations wers, g satisfactory and suesess.
March, 1867 they applied Tor and obtained from tha
1eg.sstHafHs eha5tsT in ana q which 9nrtsan ah
pany. capital stock 70 10 ssoooo,a With viii
e9seeang u addition to tho epanar po@ 11.
era contained IN private charters Of ths description
eppowGrad to eaablsh and maintain ehoical and other
SS 81 % @ ssS
hef hee d e. 81 ans
~ ze.S. sns,, be established ia
LIZ; a; ss1s, ;s
s5Ts $
p Ta .n aa:y 10 UvoF0d to them by
haf fo+37 41.tr
ed tho required capital purchased aud took possession
ol aho property md works Of Wahl Brothers 4 Light
1u tho City Of ohcago and have continued tho business
up to the present time.
s 3neson now TO- bs conatdored H. at powers
franchise which the complainants hayo under III
Does 1t offer merely corporate existence with no
hetan enoned an an nal 'e eoua hsys
Without any charter or express authority Of law7 Arc
corporation within whose territory their business, or
any Parf o. IT ta nay 10 carried on o he ohor
tic sh 10 carry on tho bnaesa tersn
mentioned, ut the points therein designated or select
81 Under tho charter FREQ from Interference provided
manner? R
Thia is question not free from difficulty, Unfor-
be decided After carcfuly considering tho argunopta
Of counsel and after examining tho referred TO-
tie point in question, an Of opinion hat Ing
81 charter secures to the complainant the ratt
10 carry on tho business at tbs points
powers bo e1erciDcd by tic yago Of Hyde Turk or
" tho City Of Chicago lntHt be exercised III manner
When the chartor was given thom, tho things Which
they we're thercin authorized 70 do, could not hayo
sion Or authority law DO gyon BY tho Legislature
Or a. h,nncinal corrorat!on having police power.
zen any erso Of to Tue e,sSs s any e @e
siye trade manufacture or business, mud he was
ans te 3. Paish,1,ent a, therefor and tho nuisance
Ssss hsa rsas e ssss}'s& = xsa
purpoae Of receiving and carrying OF from and ont q
The city, oai and dead anals. Tho whole bt,Biucss
ro tnS tine In they soeeng
The Company il not chartered 10 carry NJ inoen.
Whether company should 10 chartered for
sSeh,a sSeh prpGso, so,m.i whether such business
were subjects for tho consideration Of tho Leg,
staE 1Ha a sy that they
ny SI& psoRrssy ss said .ns: Tho
~ n Sa' rS,s s3 f. 5 a e fs'ssss ssss;
5 sSs!.sg !Asy hs y ssaa?s
build their dopots to establish tholr works, to mako
their to enter into eontrasa carry
iaih nor constitutional law viii allow Tie sato Of any
municipal corporation acting under It, to Violate dir
regard. by this ! do not Mean that this
corporation is placed beyond tho reach Of
the Inv, that II las rights secured
1t which cannot 10 taken away although the saioY
Of the public may require 1t. Tue safety Of flo people
Ia tho Bupromo Inv.
Under the right Ut eminent domain chartered rehts
may DO taken ~ well Rs any other property, WHOM
4nired for public pnrposes, hut the Constitution pro-
f1des that in such compensation shall ls made;
and, In order to take property under tie right o}
eminent domain, 1t must appear that tlla right
Of tbs to compensation Is secured to him. or
10 In
which he will 10 able to get the Compensation to which
le " entitled Gu this point speak with more dinl-
denes; but III the abgellco Of any autlorttes dreoy
eafe and reasonable ruling,
uut IN the cass before u.s. this question docs not
necessarily arise lnasmuch the Legislature has by
any direct action, manifested my Intention to from
tAa Company tho franchise by Its charter. 1t
Park 10 break up tbs business OF this Company aud to
prevent II from doing tho thinys which tho Legislature
expressly aashorzea it to do, to produce general