City of Quincy v. Ballance

30 Ill. 185
Illinois Supreme Court·Decided January 15, 1863·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Caton, C. J.

The only question in this case is, whether city ordinances imposing penalties for certain acts are penal statutes within the meaning of our law which requires security for costs to be given in prosecutions under penal statutes. This question was directly raised and expressly decided in the case of the Town of Lewistown v. Proctor, 23 Ill. 533. We have, upon the argument of this case, reconsidered the question, and are still of the opinion, that it was not the intention of the legislature, in the enactment of that law, to embrace within it city ordinances.

The judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded.

Judgment reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

City of Quincy v. Ballance, 30 Ill. 185 (Ill. 1863).

30 Ill. 185 (City of Quincy v. Ballance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Emerson v. McNeil
106 S.W. 479 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1907)
Fortune v. Incorporated Town of Wilburton
142 F. 114 (Eighth Circuit, 1905)
Illinois Central Railroad v. Foulks
92 Ill. App. 391 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1900)