Case Name: John A. Rice v. The City of Chicago
Court: Illinois Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Decision Date: 1871-09
Citations: 60 Ill. 388
Docket Number: 
Parties: John A. Rice v. The City of Chicago.
Judges: 
Reporter: Illinois Reports
Volume: 60
Pages: 388–389

Head Matter:
John A. Rice v. The City of Chicago.
Special assessments in the city of Chicago — of the certificate of publica-, tion. Certificates of publication of notices of the meeting of the commissioners to make a special assessment, and of the application to the common council for confirmation, stated that the notices had been published six days consecutively, Sundays and holidays excepted, giving the date of the first but not of the last publication : Held, the certificates were .within the case of Rich et al. v. ff/ie Oity of Chicago, 59 Ill. 286, and were insufficient.
Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Joseph E. Gaky, Judge, presiding.
This was an application for judgment upon a special assessment warrant, in the city of Chicago. *
The certificate of the printer, of publication of the notice by the commissioners of their meeting to make the assessment, was as follows:
“ This certifies that the appended corporation notice has been published in the Chicago ‘ Republican/ the corporation newspaper of the city of Chicago, county of Cook and State of Illinois, six days consecutively (excepting Sundays and holidays) commencing on the 21st day of July, A. D. 1869. Chicago, August 27, 1869.
Geo. "D. WillistoN,
Publisher and Secretary of the Chicago Republican Co.,
with seal of said Company hereto affixed.”
Notice of application for confirmation states that commissioners will apply to the common council at its next regular meeting to be held on the 6th day of September, 1869. Certificate of publication of said notice states that the same was published * * “six days consecutively, excepting Sundays and holidays, commencing with August 28, 1869. Signed by “Geo. D. Williston, publisher and Secretary of the Chicago Republican Co., with seal of said Co. hereto affixed.”
Objections to the sufficiency of these notices were overruled, and judgment rendered in favor of the-city, from which the defendant appealed.
Messrs. Barker & Waite, and Mr. Wm. Hopkies, for the appellant.
Mr. M. F. Tueey, Corporation Counsel, for the appellee.

Opinion:
Per Curiam:
This is an appeal from the judgment of the Superior Court, of the March term, 1871, rendered upon a special assessment warrant, on the application of the collector of the city of Chicago. The assessment was for the extension of Franklin street, from Madison to Adams.
This record presents but two points worthy of consideration, and they are fatal to the judgment. These are, that the city collector was not authorized to apply for judgment, and that the certificate of the printer, of publication of the notice by commissioners of their meeting to make the assessment, and of application for confirmation, was insufficient. These certificates are in the precise form as in the case of Rich et al. v. City of Chicago, 59 Ill. 286.
The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded
Judgment reversed.