Court Opinion

ID: 8140465
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-09 20:04:23.429535+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:39:31.789527
License: Public Domain

Mr. Chief Justice Waite
delivered the opinion of the court.
By a statute of Illinois “ in regard to practice in courts of record,” passed Feb. 22, 1872, the plaintiff in a suit upon a written instrument is required to file with his declaration a copy of the instrument sued upon. Rev. Stat. Ill. (1874), c. 110, p. 777, sect. 18. In obedience to this statute, the plaintiff in this case filed with his declaration copies of the bonds and coupons declared upon. In this way, we think, the bonds became a part of the pleadings in the case.
The bonds upon their face refer to the ordinance of the city council authorizing their issue, printed on the back; and in the ordinance it is distinctly recited that the election required by law was held pursuant to notice given in accordance with the *392provisions of the act authorizing a subscription, and that upon a canvass of the votes “it appeared that there had been cast for subscription a large majority of the votes of said city, the number of votes given being a large majority of all the votes polled at the last general election in said city, and a much larger vote than that required by the act aforesaid to authorize said subscription.” With this recital, in effect, upon the face of the bonds in the hands of an innocent holder, it was certainly not error in the court below to sustain a demurrer to the second, third, fourth, and fifth pleas, which simply tendered an issue as to-the authority of the city to issue the bonds, and as to the fact of the election.
The record' does not show that there was either a demurrer or replication to the sixth plea. In Laber v. Cooper (7 Wall. 565), we held that such an objection came too late after a trial and verdict below as if the pleadings had been perfect in form.

Judgment affirmed.