, 1880-02-06
rho Mandamus Case Of Cook
County VS.. County Trens-
urcr McCrea.
No Authority in the Board to
Order the Investment
Of Funds.
rext of the Supreme Courts Opin-
ION In Refusing tho
Petition.
Verdict Rendered for Macarthur
Against the Home Ma.
tioral Bank.
Tho jury Awards His Dondsmeu the
Nice Sum Of 1924, ,B25.
An Important Decision on tho Seizure Of
Goods in Transit.

An Important Decision on the 6e1Sur0 OF
goo1a in Tranait,
-
THE M'Cl.ftA -. tltn.s t,.,s!1 Oa.siu LIS. 20.
SPtffat U'po.e" '" ."s ."'sugo 1''oa"s'
OTTAWA, lll.' ~. o.aaU io.'oWn.s ~ .1v
opinion h4ea III NV onl.cn ~ -4.tt -
tho case OF COOK C"uhty W. oaitucl H. "eNSte'''
TrcnFurcr OF COOK county: .o.
Petition lor !"enuH'hasi iileo Fep. - io'o'
Opinion ny snclaon' =. Ihls ~ IN ofkhal ap.
pIlcation 70 thls coaFt aor "F'I VI niAlin.a
to compel tho county treasurer OF Cook county
to oinrcst moneys Ill MS hahas OF certain smk- t,s
lux tund Ill cefs"'n no'las y. e"'o e'u"'J, Ame ~
fnets are tNeso' ohaor INC mct u fep ~
1s'22, los'scd stntNcs !s.o, =. olst
Cook county issued anu so'u e!'ooV,u' VI oo''oo
known u .llo ooA''s' Ut new l!'acn.eu'.coe "
these si,oov,0o "rc ho" ou'a'"'a.e, u'in A'n
ture May J, ls'h'' FROM year 70 ycar tno nohlu
Ut County Goh'ihnssnne1s VI GooX eo"n.y hnso
levied Afes 10 essapilsn u l"hu u pay Wy psn'-
cipal Of salu oonus ~heh'tne san'e saounA mAs
tire, and thofe - now IN INC aanas u tao ~.
fendant, VINO 10 treasurer OK cook county, .no
sum OF *1lt-le.oS ooloNe!n8 ~ e"'" .u"a
In 1919 mo assntsteo oi S.i0'oou ol tno pouas VI
aiu county WIS ou'y n'tnoli]ea W sae p.tpos ~
o. ouliaiag IL to'rt-!iouse ~ e,'iu era"ss. ~
these s!'oo "tu seo W lo ,,ai'os y. .uo EMILY
by rcsulutlon Of March 81, 1871, directed tho de-
SarSant n, tnlc sitl x, n, ani fun,, In Ills hnnds
49,, t,,o.t =, IL, an,,l row ,.oui,s nt
par and hold tho sn'ne until tho
maturity OF the fire bonds, or
,mt,, otharwlso ordered by tho Hoard. This tho
"a.a,Jar. ,.ar,,sad ~ 10 toiIouiw'. n, cnmn.,.
ue'enauns retussa " ao BELIEVING .as,. sno e'us m,,
Doard had 10 power III tho premises. THO
county now seeks by maudnmus to coerce
con,ptIanco with tho sutd resolution. The case
mike tho order III question. me statutory pr'r
Visions tho more especially bearing upon tho
subject arc tho following:
I .uuy nous - un' ~, s..Sa
slh5k nAeo power ~ WhtAko tue COUNTY luHoa
and county business. except Us otherwise
cspcojully provided tRevisod StututcB 1874,
cbnntnr. conntl..s. soc. oSI
euarn.' nouns' =. ~ 49, ~
whenever a LAX ls loVico 1or mo payment OF
aspeciaea debt, the nnount OF sa!d tax coicesed
6lnll Oe kopt gs u gcpnrutc fund In tho County
Trcos,ry nnt, cYprndcd only In tho lfnuIdatlon
~ st. t,, .y -. -, ,.
OF sueh lhaepteoness' proslueo' tnht hny eu.
plus remaining IN tho Treasury aftcr full pay.
mcnt OF such Indebtedness shall be transferred
N tho rom,ron fnnd ~ tho countv rIbtd, gcx
~ ~ .ne eoAn'n'" Ao'o " tNo ~S3A''' t'o'@' wv
a'.J -..... :.
"Tho County Treasurer shall receive md
,,,o,,nva of thn couptv nnd nil r11onev md
nl"Io1S eA tun oe"v ua 80 ,s
niM' a !t1 osuu51e ,nu g2 ,1,s,,!,s
don Of law says Dillon. that q municipal COR
poratton possesses and can sxcrc!so tho follow
ing powers anu ne offers; ~ Inoso stanteG n
fnppf,an ~ ~ iscont ~ ~" nnwcr e1nrcssIy
wrnntcd: ~ thoso not nione cssontial to tho d.
elarel object and purposes OF tho corporation,
nnt luaispensAblo to every munscipai corpora-
st,,,t ~ Iy ,snE ~ ~ cta"tm Ia ~ erWnno ~