*1 It is July, duty clerk to county extend rate which was in force when the was made. levy People v. Illinois Central Railroad Co. Ill. 408. judgment court county of Cook county ,

correct and is therefore affirmed. Jttdgmenl affirmed.

(No. 20084.- Village of vs. Hazelcrest, Appellee, Edward Lam et al. Appellants.

bert Opinion February filed Irving H. Lewe, of coun- Ripstra, (John Charles for sel,) appellants.

Maloney, & Whiteside, Wooster appellee.

Mr. Edmunds reported opinion: Commissioner This is an objectors from a appeal eight judgment assessment confirming special for a local improvement. It is that when stipulated ordinance filing came before the a motion petition and this it,

made to motion was seconded. Three trus- pass tees voted for the ordinance and three trustees voted against it. The ex- declared a tie board, having *2 cast his vote in isting, favor of the ordinance and declared passed. made is that the ordi- point appellants nance is invalid because it did not receive the vote a ma- of of jority all the members elected in ac- board, village cordance with the for the act to requirements provide incorporation of cities and villages, 10, approved April 1872. 8 of article 11 of the act question originally provided that in each six under the act village organized trustees should be elected, to hold office for one year; these trustees should choose one of their own number presi- dent, and that “wherever the words ‘mayor’ council’ or ‘city occur in this act, the same shall be held to trus- to the apply tees and president of such far may- so as the same village, be applicable.” (Rev. Stat. 1874, p. 243.) Although section was amended in then made are changes not material from the and standpoint case, present provision that the words council” or “city “mayor” shall be held to to the apply trustees and of a president village still remains. (Cahill’s 24, Stat. par. 260.) chap.

In an act “An entitled, and concerning villages incorporated towns,” (Laws of 1887, p. 116,) adopted, follows:

“Sec. That trustees and officers required by law, a president of each and every village incorporated town shall hereafter be elected annually by voters such town, or at village election of regular with the town, election of such village commencing or town held in the A. village year D. and such presi- dent of town shall hold his incorporated office term of one and until his year successor elected and or in- qualified. any village town shall be of the board corporated of trustees board, said at all meetings shall preside thereof, duties the same the same and shall have perform powers of boards be law to the may as are or given in case he shall not except of trustees villages, he shall vote. when give All conflict acts and of acts parts “Sec. of this act are hereby repealed.” two- the act was amended to provide also board, term for the and it was

year “shall have the same provided the same duties as are or be may given perform law to the have been cities, or that heretofore given trustees in villages, but he shall not in case of a tie, when shall vote.” (Cahill’s 1929, chap. Stat. par. 1196.) Section of article 11 the act origi- nally “the president of the board of trustees perform duties and exercise the conferred *3 the upon mayor of city a five in- thousand exceeding and habitants,” that the “shall have the to right vote as a trustee at of the when trustees; but meeting he shall have so voted shall not have the the to give vote.” It was also and trustees should have the same and duties as powers in cities not and council five thousand mayor city exceeding 1874, 243.) inhabitants. (Rev. Stat. Section p. 9 it amended in As amended contained no reference tlie of the but the section pro- vided “the board of trustees shall per- form the duties and exercise the conferred powers upon that “the mayor city,” of a and trustees shall perform exercise duties and all the conferred aider- upon men in and the cities; and board of trustees may exercise the same conferred upon and mayor council of city cities, ordinances like manner.” pass 24, (Cahill’s 1929, chap. par. 264.) Stat. Section amended, which has not been 1872, n of the act of shall passed villages “The of ordinances provides: style be the President and Board as follows: ‘Be it ordained by of Trustees of of..........,’ may case Village (as be).” of said article 11 (Ibid. par. 265.) pro- vided that “the and board of trustees may ap- fill a clerk point and whenever pro tempore, necessary one more vacancies; also or may treasurer, appoint street other commissioners, constable, officers as may 243.) be necessary.” (Rev. 1874, p. Stat. This section was amended in the word by substituting “marshal” for the word “constable,” but other respects is the same as 24, when adopted. (Cahill’s chap. Stat. par. 266.) deal to those act of

Referring portions primarily cities from distinguished villages, shall council consist provides: city “The ánd aldermen.” Stat. (Cahill’s chap. “The 6 of par. article of act 31.) Section provides: council, shall at all preside meetings when shall case shall not vote 20.) Section par. vote.” (Ibid. shall be taken nays “The yeas of said provides: and on all ordinances, propositions all passage city, expendi- any liability against to create other cases and in all money, of its ture or appropriation entered on shall be any member, at the request aof and the concurrence of its journal proceedings; council in the members elected all the majority such ordinance of any be necessary all two-thirds of Provided, shall require proposition: *4 or school sell elect to any property.” the aldermen “A ma- 8 of 44.) provides: (Ibid. par. 3 do constitute a quorum elect shall the aldermen of jority 39.) business.” (Ibid. par.

109 premise is based of appellants argument of village trustees of of the board of that member of been have be held to cannot Hazelcrest all the of “a majority that therefore board, village ordi- in did concur elected” members by section as nance, required 3 13 statutory provisions above of the Consideration that this premise shows to each other their relation proper 8 and Under sections foundation. is without substantial chosen being the president, of article 11 of the act of 1872 a member was necessarily from the trustees of the board, another statute board. village passed election trustees. It was further that he should have the provided same and duties as boards of trustees presidents but it he should not formerly had, was also vote in case aof when he should casting- vote. By the amendment to act of presi- dent of the board was same vested duties as are cities given as well those of mayors section presidents village boards. virtue of 8 of arti- By cle of the act of wherever the words coun- “city cil” or occur “mayor” in the act the shall be same held apply trustees and the boards, presidents village and it is expressly section 1 of article provided by of3 same act council shall consist of the aldermen. Provision for the to vote in case of tie made of article 2 of the act of Al- by boards to though presidents save case of a tie, was, effect, cut off the act of that act as amended in there is nothing contained or in therein, other re- statutory provision, the conclusion that the quiring case a tie was restricted to situations such as were not covered of section of the act of and that section must now be held *5 effect, concurrence of a of all say, majority “aldermen”

the elected of all necessary passage ordinances, as fall within its propositions purview. In section itself it that a distinction was clearly appears drawn between “members elected” and “aldermen.” concurrence of a of “members elected” is there majority for prescribed the of all ordinances and passage propositions to create the the liability against city or for expenditure its but the section to re- appropriation money, proceeds quire two-thirds “all the aldermen elect” to sell any school or city has been further Such distinction property. recognized section 8 of article majority 3, requiring of the “aldermen elect” for a quorum.

Appellants nevertheless, that to the act of argue, prior “no tie could ever the exist on of an ordinance passage because the entire board of trustees mem- consisted of six bers, and a could in no majority event be less than four. There could be no the object office of creating to break tiea when no tie could ever exist. The legislature felt no for until necessity the act more than amending thirty years because the clear and elapsed; unambiguous of section for language of article a concur- rence of a majority of all members elected. It is very obvious that the legislature did not intend to im- repeal by sectipn plication any on part that, it contrary, sought business expedite village by giv- a tie ing break whenever arose out of the power volume great business that comes before municipal legislative to all ex- body village, relating matters ordinances and or for the cept liability creating expenditure money;” that the neces- appropriation sity giving to vote never existed where ordinances were involved, that since no occasion could under arise, circumstances, which necessi- would tate vote under section giving it is therefore a reasonable deduction to say

Ill was intended legislature amendment did in all cases the president to dif- It is somewhat arise under not In the first line place, of reasoning. to follow ficult members on six only that with would seem obvious an ordinances, tie exist on the board a could the second it. place, did exist to break therefore object until did wait provide legislature but did so to the trustees election a president *6 11 of the section of article 1887. of the village which originally provided vote as a trustee but that board should have to right when, voted he should not have to had so was and reference to the amended, The to vote was eliminated. amendment was framed in the of the act of 1887, obviously light a the six members of to the board trustees, and which dealt with defined of such to cases voting by limiting power where there was a tie. is not In the third place, appar- ent that specific were anywhere limitations kind put upon exercise by of the right, affirmatively given, break a reason no substantial appears only was intended to be conferred that such saying power not covered in situations 3. City v. call attention McLean East Appellants Ill. There council Louis, city of East St. stated the court consist of the mayor was St. Louis At alderman had resigned. and fourteen aldermen. One twelve were aldermen and where meeting for a local an ordinance providing improvement present aldermen was its seven passage, voting aye placed upon did not The five vote. ordinance voting nay. n^or held declared It was that the ordinance was was passed. it had received majority invalid because not vote of all in- council, the members elected expressed tention of legislature being legislative body of the full consist number of always aldermen. The case at bar an different situation. presents altogether Appellants Dreher, People also rely v. Ill. where it was held that a council cannot remove a from office. The contention that the in the pres ent case not to vote the tie is qualified to break borne out by the result there reached or the language of that opinion. judgment the county court is affirmed.

Per : The Mr. foregoing Curiam opinion reported by Commissioner as the hereby Edmunds adopted opinion is entered in court, and accordance therewith. judgment

Judgment affirmed. (No. 20301. vs. Frank

Patra Arliskas, Appellant, Arliskas, Appellee. Opinion February 18, filed