« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
Inheritance tax against.
The Amendatory Act of 1901 (Inheritance Tax) applies to domestic corporations, but does not relieve a foreign educational corporation from an inheritance tax upon a devise of real estate by a citizen of Illinois.
In re Estate of Speed, 216 Ill. 23. A law requiring a foreign educational corporation to pay an inheritance tax on a devise, but exempting domestic corporations from such tax, is not unconstitutional.
In re Estate of Speed, 216 I1l. 23.
The franchises of the corporations are the permits, grants and privileges they receive from municipalities. They are to be distinguished from the charter, which is the right to be a corporation, and is granted by the State under general statute, while a franchise is merely a privilege given the corporation to exercise the powers given by its charter in the territory controlled by the municipality granting the permit or franchise. All franchises are conditional and the conditions must be continuously filled to insure continuance. And franchises, when accepted by the corporation are contracts between the corporation and the municipality.
Proceedings to Secure.—There is no method prescribed by law as necessary in the application for a franchise. The president or manager of the company may personally see some representative of the municipality who is in position to present the matter to the City Council, Village or County Board, as the case may be. A committee is usually appointed to confer with the company's representative. Together they formulate an ordinance on the matter and present it to the official body. If passed, it must further be accepted by the company. Once accepted, it becomes a legal contract binding on both parties and subject to the general law of contracts.
The essentials of a franchise are: (1) a valid ordinance, (2) duly passed, approved and published, and (3) duly accepted by a company, (4) authorized by its charter to accept it and perform the acts required by its terms. (For form of Acceptance of Franchise, Form No. 78.)
Nature and force of grant.
Ordinance granting use of street is a license, not franchise.
City of Chicago v. Chicago Tel. Co., 230 III. 157. Right to operate an elevated railroad under city ordinance is a license, not a franchise. Section 88, Practice Act.
City of Chicago v. Rothschild & Co., 212 III. 590.
Construction of a franchise as to duty of company, not questioning its existence, does not involve the franchise so as to take appeal to Supreme Court.
Rostad v. Chicago S. W. & L. Co., 211 I11. 248. Public grants of privileges are construed most strongly against the grantee.
C. T. R. R. Co. v. City of Chicago, 203 Ill. 576. What may be waived by city, of the conditions of a grant to a corporation.
McWethy v. Aurora Elec. Light Co., 202 Ill. 218 (230). A corporation franchise is a mere license until accepted and construction begun. It is then a contract.
Chicago Tel. Co. v. N. W. Tel. Co., 199 Ill. 324 (342). The right to grant similar rights to another corporation in the same street, is subject to the limitation that the second grant must not deprive the first grantee of the privileges granted it. Rule stated, p. 350.
Chicago Tel. Co. v. N. W. Tel. Co., 199 III. 324. A mortgage of a franchise that cannot be assigned without the city's consent, is not ultra vires, but title by foreclosure does not give the right to operate without the consent of the city.
Wells v. Northern Trust Co., 195 Ill. 288. A grant to a corporation is a mere license until accepted. It then becomes a contract; revocable for cause only.
People v. Central Union Tel. Co., 192 Ill. 307.
A grant to a street railway company is a license until accepted and acted upon. It is then a contract.
Harvey v. Aurora & Geneva Ry. Co., 186 III. 283. The purchaser of a railroad on foreclosure, is bound by the conditions of its franchise as set out in the ordinance grant
C. M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. City of Chicago, 183 Ill. 341. Fact that franchise requires elevated railroad company to repair street, etc., does not exempt it from special assessment.
Lake St. “L" R. R. Co. v. City of Chicago, 183 Ill. 75. The franchise and right of way of an elevated railroad may be assessed for an improvement, by special assessment, of street under its structure. (Section 40 of Local Improvement Act notwithstanding.)
Lake St. “L” R. R. Co. v. City of Chicago, 183 I11. 75. The grant to a steam railroad company to lay tracks in a street, is not a franchise.
City of Chester v. W. C. & W. R. R. Co., 182 Ill. 382. A street railway franchise duly granted and accepted is not a mere private contract, but a quasi public affair in which the people have such an interest that they may compel compliance by mandamus.
People v. Suburban R. R. Co., 178 III. 594.
Wilmington Water Power Co. v. Evans, 166 Ill. 548. Whether franchise is involved in suit depends upon the decree, not the pleadings—decree appointing receiver.
Chicago Steel Works v. Ill. Steel Co., 153 Ill. 9 (16). "Franchise" defined as a privilege granted by sovereign power to do something not a common right of all to do. Trade-mark is not.
Hazelton Boiler Co. v. Hazelton Tripod Co., 137 Ill. 231. A corporate franchise, i. e., the right to be a corporation, cannot be sold or transferred.
Fietsam v. Hay, 122 Ill. 293.
“Franchise" defined as rights and privileges conferred by legislative grant, i. e., to be a corporation with the powers named in the charter.
Fietsam v. Hay, 122 I11. 293. The franchise, or right to be, is vested in the individual stockholders, not in the body corporate.
Fietsam v. Hay, 122 Ill. 293. Corporations receive their franchises subject to the police power of the State.
Concordia Cemetery Co. v. M. & N. R. R. Co., 121 Ill. 199. A franchise to a railroad company to lay tracks in a street must clearly show such intention. A clause in an ordinance giving permission to lay such tracks “as may be necessary to convenient use of depot grounds now owned or hereafter acquired," is not sufficient. Grants nothing.
C. D. & N. R. R. Co. v. City of Chicago, 121 111. 176. Bill for receiver and to dissolve the corporation involves a franchise so as to take writ of error to Supreme Court.
St. L. & S. C. & M. Co. v. Edwards, 103 Ill. 472. All franchises granting the use of streets must be passed by a majority of all the elected councilmen; be approved by the mayor, and entered on the city records. Resolution is not sufficient.
People v. Loeffler, 1 III. C. C. R. 381. Franchise defined as a particular privilege given by grant of government to an individual or corporation.
People v. A. T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 2 I11. C. C. R. 1. An ordinance granting a franchise to a telephone company with conditions, is not a contract but an exercise of sovereign power.
Ill. Mfg. Co. v. Chicago Tel. Co., 1 Ill. C. C. R. 1.
Franchise will be forfeited for non-user or abuse. Corporation must fulfill the purposes of their charter.
Edgar Collegiate Inst. v. People, 142 Ill. 363 (366).