Furlong v. South Park Commissioners

172 N.E. 757, 340 Ill. 363
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedJune 20, 1930
DocketNo. 20096. Decree affirmed.
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 172 N.E. 757 (Furlong v. South Park Commissioners) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Furlong v. South Park Commissioners, 172 N.E. 757, 340 Ill. 363 (Ill. 1930).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Farmer

delivered the opinion of the court:

It is generally known throughout the State that a rather large building erected in Jackson Park, in the city of Chicago, as a part of the World’s Columbian Exposition of 1893 and known as the Fine Arts Building, was not destroyed as most of the buildings were at the termination of the Columbian Exposition. The building was of unusual architectural design and beauty and was taken over by the South Park Commissioners, and its occupation was allowed the Columbian Museum, and later the Field Columbian Museum, which was a corporation not for pecuniary profit. The Field Museum, after an occupancy of about twenty-six years, vacated the building during 1920. It had become somewhat dilapidated and in disrepair, and the South Park Commissioners, after receiving many requests from civic bodies and other organizations for the preservation of the building, resolved to preserve, repair and reconstruct it in a manner suitable for use, among other purposes, as an industrial museum. The cost of the work was to be defrayed by a bond issue of $5,000,000, which at a referendum election held in June, 1924, the people voted to issue to preserve the building for public purposes, among them a museum. In March, 1925, after the people had voted for the bond issue, William H. Furlong, who is appellant here, filed a tax-payer’s bill in the superior court of Cook county to enjoin the issue of the bonds. The court dismissed the bill, and the decree, on' appeal, was affirmed by this court April 23, 1926, in Furlong v. South Park Comrs. 320 Ill. 507. In 1926 Julius Rosenwald proposed to establish an industrial museum, and on August 18 of that year he and the Commercial Club of Chicago submitted a proposal to the South Park Commissioners for the use of the Fine Arts Building. Rosenwald proposed to contribute a sum not less than $3,000,000 to pay the deficit of the cost of reconstructing and restoring the Fine Arts Building after the application of the $5,000,000 bond issue for that purpose and the balance of the $3,000,000 was to be used for the general purposes of the museum. The proposal was considered and accepted by the South Park Commissioners, and a corporation not for pecuniary profit was organized for the purpose of acquiring and operating an industrial museum. The corporation was first designated the Rosenwald Industrial Museum, but its name was later changed to Museum of Science and Industry. The charter of the corporation provides it is “a corporation not for pecuniary profit and no part of the net earnings thereof shall inure to the benefit of any member, private shareholder or individual, and the said corporation shall be operated exclusively for scientific, literary, school and educational purposes.” Any person of good moral character was eligible to membership in the corporation. Its first board of trustees, consisting of eighteen persons, was selected by the Commercial Club of Chicago and is composed of prominent and public-spirited citizens. Later the number of trustees was increased to twenty-three, making the five members, from time to time, of the South Park Commissioners ex-officio trustees of the museum corporation. Between the time of the proposal and March, 1929, the South Park Commissioners in June, 1928, passed an ordinance providing for the issuance of the $5,000,000 bond issue for the purpose of obtaining funds necessary to restore and reconstruct the Fine Arts Building. Bids were received for the work, and being in excess of the authorized bond issue all bids were rejected. The prospective deficit to make the desired improvement and restoration of the building as planned appeared to be between one and a half and two million dollars. Thereafter Julius Rosenwald agreed to pay whatever deficit there might be in the restoration of the building in addition to the gift of $3,000,000 mentioned in his proposal of August 18, 1926. On March 20, 1929, the South Park Commissioners passed an ordinance authorizing the execution of an agreement with the Rosenwald Industrial Museum relative to the restoration of the Fine Arts Building in Jackson Park and its use and occupancy by the museum corporation. The agreement was set forth in full in the ordinance, and by its terms the South Park Commissioners agreed to issue bonds in amount of $5,000,000 as authorized by a vote of the people for the purpose of restoring the exterior of the Fine Arts Building in Jackson Park and the reconstruction of the interior in such manner as to permanently preserve the building and render it suitable for certain public purposes mentioned. The ordinance and agreement recited the Supreme Court had decided the proposed bond issue was valid and that the Rosenwald Industrial Museum, an Illinois corporation, was authorized to establish and maintain a museum relating to the progress of industry and science; that the museum corporation was desirous of acquiring the Fine Arts Building for that purpose, and Julius Rosenwald agreed to contribute $3,000,000 to the museum corporation, conditioned upon the allocation to it of the site and the restoration and reconstruction of the building in accordance with the agreement. The ordinance and agreement recited that the use of the building as an industrial museum is advantageous to the public interest and is a practicable use of the property, and provided the commissioners should allocate to the museum the building and certain land surrounding that upon which the building stands. The ordinance and agreement provided that so long as the museum corporation maintained and operated an industrial museum on said site the site was to be kept free from all other buildings; that the commissioners should sell such portions of the bonds authorized as in their discretion would yield a sum adequate for the restoration of the exterior of the building and proceed forthwith to enter into a contract or contracts for the restoration of the exterior of the building with all reasonable dispatch. The commissioners agreed to apply the entire net proceeds of the sale of all the bonds to the cost of restoring the exterior of the building, the payment of architect’s fees, and, so far as the net proceeds shall extend, to the cost of reconstruction of the interior of the building. The museum corporation agreed to pay the balance of the cost of restoration after the bond issue had been used. The museum corporation was to hold the park commissioners harmless at all times against any loss, cost or expense occasioned by injuries to persons in the operation of the museum. On June 28, 1929, appellant filed an amended and supplemental bill in this case. The bill sets forth the substance of the proposal made by the Commercial Club of Chicago and Julius Rosenwald to the South Park Commissioners relative to the reconstruction and use of the Fine Arts Building as an'industrial museum, and also sets forth the agreement of March 20, 1929, with the Rosenwald Industrial Museum pursuant to the ordinance of the South Park Commissioners, whereby the park commissioners would allocate to the museum corporation, without any charge for rentals or otherwise, the Fine Arts Building and certain lands immediately surrounding it. A prayer and motion for a temporary injunction restraining the park commissioners from carrying out their ordinance and agreement with the museum corporation was denied. Thereafter the court entered a decree dismissing the bill for want of equity, and complainant, who filed the bill as a tax-payer, has appealed.

The decree covers approximately seventy pages of the abstract, is very full, and describes minutely the museum corporation, its purposes and benefits. The decree is too long to quote in this opinion.

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

Related

Winokur v. Rosewell
414 N.E.2d 724 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1980)
People Ex Rel. Adamowski v. Chicago Railroad Terminal Authority
151 N.E.2d 311 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1958)
People Ex Rel. Adamowski v. Public Building Commission
142 N.E.2d 67 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1957)
United Community Services v. Omaha National Bank
77 N.W.2d 576 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1956)
Gritton v. City of Des Moines
73 N.W.2d 813 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1955)
Thomas v. Daughters of Utah Pioneers
197 P.2d 477 (Utah Supreme Court, 1948)
Cremer v. Peoria Housing Authority
78 N.E.2d 276 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1948)
The People v. Chi. Transit Authority
64 N.E.2d 4 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1945)
Willett v. State Board of Examiners
115 P.2d 287 (Montana Supreme Court, 1941)
People Ex Rel. Douglas v. Barrett
19 N.E.2d 340 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1939)
Stevens Hotel Co. v. Art Institute
260 Ill. App. 555 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1931)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
172 N.E. 757, 340 Ill. 363, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/furlong-v-south-park-commissioners-ill-1930.