Case Name: The People ex rel. George J. Eastes, County Collector, Appellee, vs. The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company, Appellant
Court: Illinois Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Decision Date: 1913-12-17
Citations: 261 Ill. 156
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People ex rel. George J. Eastes, County Collector, Appellee, vs. The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Illinois Reports
Volume: 261
Pages: 156–156

Head Matter:
The People ex rel. George J. Eastes, County Collector, Appellee, vs. The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company, Appellant.
Opinion filed December 17, 1913.
Taxes — fact that there is a balance in county treasury does not invalidate tax levy to that extent. The fact that there is a considerable sum of money in the county treasury on September 1 does not, of itself, render invalid to the extent of that sum the levy to pay the county expenses for the ensuing year. (People v, Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Ry. Co. ante, p. 33, followed.)
Appeal from the County Court of Knox county; the Hon. R. C. Rice, Judge, presiding.
Robert Dunlap, Dee F. English, and Williams, Lawrence, Welsh & Green, for appellant.
P. J. Lucey, Attorney General, and A. J. BouTELLE, State’s Attorney, for appellee.

Opinion:
Per Curiam :
The question arising upon this record is the same as that in the case of People v. Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Co. (ante, p. 33.) The report of the revenue committee of the county board showed a balance of $40,049.14 on September 1, 1912, to be used for county purposes for the ensuing year, and the expenditures for the preceding year to have been $104,207.73. The committee presented an itemized statement of the amount of money required to pay the expenses of the county for the ensuing year and recommended the levy of $110,855, the aggregate of the items. The levy was made accordingly, and it is now objected that such levy was excessive to the extent of the balance in the treasury, ($40,049.14,) and was to that extent illegal and void. We held to the contrary in the case cited, and for the reasons given in the opinion in that case this judgment is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.