(147 N.E.)

Western Railway Co. v. Birney, 71 Ill. 391; Daughetee v. Ohio Oil Co., supra. The evidence with reference to the value of the three horses should have been excluded. Its admission constitutes reversible error.

The judgments of the Appellate and circuit courts will be reversed, and the cause remanded to the circuit court for a new trial. Reversed and remanded.

of hay and grain fed to the cows of the de- those germs in other places on the farm. A fendant in error, while confined to the barn review of the testimony fails to establish lot, because of the pollution of the waters of that the polluted stream was the cause of the creek, (2) the alleged resulting loss of the lockjaw. So far as the record shows, milk, and (3) the cost of labor and the val- the horses might have become infected elseue of the defendant in error's time in driv- where. The evidence concerning the source ing his horses to and from water, were pure- of the tetanus germs which infected the ly speculative and conjectural and for that horses was purely speculative and conjecreason are not proper elements of damage. tural. Where resort must be taken to specuIf by reason of the wrongful acts of which | lation or conjecture for the purpose of deterthe defendant in error complained he sus- mining whether the damage results from the tained these items of damage they were prop- wrongful act of which complaint is made er elements to be submitted to the jury. or from some other cause, damages cannot Damages must, however, be the proximate be allowed. Indianapolis, Bloomington & result of the wrong of which complaint is made. Where the right of recovery exists, the defendant cannot escape liability because the damages are difficult of exact ascertainment. The nature of the inquiry in the instant case is such that it is difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain with mathematical certainty the amount of the defendant in error's damages, but this difficulty affords no answer to a cause of action which results from a breach of duty imposed by law. The unliquidated damages growing out of the commission of a tort are seldom susceptible of exact measurement. The rule is, that while the law will not permit witnesses to speculate or conjecture as to possible or probable damages, still the best evidence which the subject will admit is receivable, and this. Towns evidence is often nothing better than the opinions of persons well informed upon the Where record of annual town meeting subject under investigation. Daughetee V. showed that tax as certified was actually auOhio Oil Co., 263 Ill. 518, 105 N. E. 308. thorized by electors of town present at meetSome of the evidence adduced by the de- ing held on April 3d, and tax was levied by fendant in error to establish the items claim- proper authority and at time fixed by stated was merely speculative and conjectural ute, but town clerk's certificate was dated and should not have been admitted. There March 27th, held that, under Revenue Law, § 191, on hearing of objections to tax, court was, however, sufficient competent evidence properly permitted amendment of date of cerconcerning these items to warrant the sub-tificate. mission of the cause to the jury.

[8,9] The plaintiff in error also contends

(316 III. 403)

PEOPLE ex rel. OLMSTED, County Collector,
v. WABASH RY. CO. (No. 16570.)
(Supreme Court of Illinois.

April 24, 1925.) 56-Amendment of date of town

clerk's certificate as to taxes voted held proper.

2. Highways 127(1)-Failure of highway commissioner's certificate to show separate purposes for which levy made renders tax void.

Where certificate of levy of road and bridge tax filed by highway commissioner did not separately state purposes for which tax was levied, as required by Roads and Bridges Act, § 50 (b), subpar. 3, as amended by Laws 1923,

that evidence of the value of the three horses
should not have been admitted, because it
was not shown that the sewage in the creek
caused the lockjaw from which they died.
Dr. H. N. Heflin, a physician, testified that
if there were open sores on horses or cattle
the wounds might become infected and re-
sult in lockjaw. Frank Luper, a veterina- P. 540, such tax levy was void.
rian, who attended one of the horses, testi-
fied that he did not find any abrasions on
the animal, and that tetanus germs were
most commonly found in garden and barn-
yard soils. Other witnesses testified that
tetanus germs were prevalent in barnyard
manure, barren lots, and on barbed wire
fences. No testimony was offered that there
were any open sores or abrasions on any of
the three horses owned by the defendant in
error. There was no testimony that the
horses were more likely to contract lockjaw
from tetanus germs in the creek than from

3. Highways 127(1)-Amendment of record
to show purpose for which tax levied held
error, where not shown to have been sepa-
rately considered, as required by statute.

On hearing of objections to road and bridge taxes, allowance of amendment of record of meeting of highway commissioners to show purpose for which taxes were levied, held error, in support of where testimony introduced amendment failed to show that highway commissioner had separately stated purposes for which taxes were levied, as required by Roads and Bridges Act, § 50 (b), subpar. 3, as amended by Laws 1923, p. 540.

For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes

4. Highways

127(1)-Amendment of record of meeting held ineffectual, where tax levies not,itemized, as required by statute.

Where certificates of levy of road and bridge taxes filed by highway commissioners, as required by Roads and Bridges Act, § 56, were not itemized as required by section 50, as amended by Laws 1923, p. 540, allowance of amendment of record of meeting of highway commissioners and board of auditors, at hearing of objections, to show purpose for which taxes had been levied, held improper and ineffectual.

Appeal from Vermilion County Court; Walter J. Bookwalter, Judge.

Application by the People, on the relation of G. Stanley Olmsted, County Collector, for judgment and order of sale for delinquent taxes, to which the Wabash Railway Company filed objections. From a judgment overruling objections, the Railway Company appeals. Affirmed in part, and reversed in part.

Gunn, Penwell & Lindley, of Danville (N. S. Brown and L. H. Strasser, both of St Louis, Mo., of counsel). for appellant.

Elmer O. Furrow, State's Atty., of Danville (John H. Lewman and I. R. Carter, both of Danville, of counsel), for appellee.

DE YOUNG, J. To the application of the county collector of Vermilion county for judgment and order of sale for delinquent taxes the Wabash Railway Company filed objections to the town tax of the town of Danville and to the road and bridge taxes of the towns of Catlin and Newell. The objections were overruled by the county court, | and the railway company prosecutes this appeal.

[1] The record of the annual town meeting of the town of Danville, held on the first Tuesday of April, 1923, which was the 3d day of that month, shows that the electors present at that meeting directed that $10,000, in the aggregate, for specified town purposes, be raised by taxation. The town clerk certified to the county clerk of Vermilion county the amount of the tax so required, and in his certificate set forth the several purposes, the sum necessary for each purpose, and that the levy had been voted at the town meeting. The certificate was filed with the county clerk on April 6, 1923, but was dated the 27th day of March of the same year. Appellant's objection to the tax is that the town clerk's certificate, by reason of its date, shows that the levy was made by the board of auditors. Upon the hearing appellee introduced, over appellant's objection, an amended certificate, dated April 3, 1923, which differed from the original only in the date. The question is whether the amendment was properly allowed.

The record of the annual town meeting shows that the tax as certified was actually

authorized by the electors of the town present at that meeting, held on the first Tuesday of April. The tax was ordered or levied by the proper authority and at the time fixed by statute. The only objection made to the form of the certificate filed with the county clerk is its date. The testimony shows that the town clerk prepared two certificates-one dated March 27, and the other April 3, 1923-and that he filed the former by mistake. The error in the date of the certificate was an informality not affecting in any manner the substantial justice of the tax. Section 191 of the Revenue Law (Smith-Hurd Rev. St. 1923, c. 120, § 179) authorizes the correction of such an irregularity, and the oral testimony was admissible to show the facts which justified the amendment or correction. People v. Wabash Railroad Co., 265 Ill. 588, 107 N. E. 154; People v. Payne, 296 Ill. 236, 129 N. E. 759; Cincinnati, Indianapolis & Western Railway Co. v. People, 207 Ill. 566, 69 N. E. 938; Id., 206 Ill. 565, 69 N. E. 628, and Id., 212 III. 518, 72 N. E. 770. The objection to the town tax of the town of Danville was properly overruled.

[2] The road and bridge taxes of the towns of Catlin and Newell were certified by the highway commissioners of the respective towns to the board of supervisors of Vermilion county in lump sums. Appellant objects to each of these taxes on the ground that a road and bridge tax cannot be so certified. Subparagraph 3 of paragraph (b) of section 50 of the Roads and Bridges Act (Acts 1913, p. 542), as amended by Laws 1923, p. 540, provides that the highway commissioner, in determining the amount to be levied for road and bridge purposes, shall state separately the several amounts to be levied for the construction of roads, the maintenance of roads, the construction of bridges, the maintenance of bridges, the purchase of machinery, the repairs to machinery, the oiling of roads, and the prevention and extirpation of weeds. This provision is mandatory, and the failure to comply with it is not a mere irregularity, but a fatal omission, which renders the tax levy void. People v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co., 314 Ill. 455, 145 N. E. 727; People v. Illinois Central Railroad Co., 314 Ill. 373, 145 N. E. 731; People v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co., 314 Ill. 532, 145 N. E. 671; People v. Chicago, Terre Haute & Southeastern Railway Co., 315 Ill. 589, 146 N. E. 532.

[3] Upon the hearing appellee was allowed by the county court, against appellant's objection, to amend the record of the meeting of the highway commissioner and board of auditors of each of the towns of Catlin and Newell to show, as contended, the purposes for which the road and bridge

For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes

(147 N.E.)

Appeal from Vermilion County Court; Walter J. Bookwalter, Judge.

Application by the People, on the relation of G. Stanley Olmsted, County Collector, for judgment for delinquent taxes, to which the Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railway Company filed objections. From a judgment rendered for the tax, the Railway Company appeals. Affirmed in part, and reversed in

taxes had been levied and the sum required | the $100, under Revenue Act, § 128, county for each purpose. The testimony introduced clerk was authorized to extend tax at rate of in support of these amendments fails satis-43 cents. factorily to show that either highway commissioner had, prior to the hearing, considered separately the sum required for each purpose, as prescribed by subparagraph 3 of paagraph (b) of section 50 of the Roads and Bridges Act. There was no showing of compliance with this statutory requirement. To justify the amendment of a record which is the basis of a tax levy, by showing some additional action by the taxing authorities, it is necessary that such action shall have been actually taken, and that which was not, in fact, done cannot by any amendment be shown to have been done. People v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co., 261 Ill. 70, 103 N. E. 623. The amendments should not have been allowed.

part.

H. M. Steely and H. M. Steely, Jr., both of Danville, for appellant.

Elmer O. Furrow, State's Atty., of Danville (John H. Lewman and I. R. Carter, both of Danville, of counsel), for appellee.

FARMER, J. Appellant railroad company objected to judgment being rendered by the county court of Vermilion county against its property for certain taxes. The objections were overruled, judgment rendered for the tax, and the railroad company has appealed to this court.

The taxes objected to are the road and bridge taxes of the towns of Catlin, Jamaica, Newell, Pilot, and Oakwood, and the town tax for the town of Danville.

[4] Apart from this consideration, the amendments were confined merely to the records of the meetings of the highway commissioners and boards of auditors of the two towns. In both cases of People v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co., 314 Ill. supra, it was held that the certificate of levy required by section 56 of the Roads and Bridges Act (Smith's Stat. 1923, p. 1796, § 62), must be itemized in accordance with the provisions of section 50 of the same act, because the information conveyed by such itemization is necessary to enable the county board to exercise its judgThe objections to the road and bridge taxment advisedly in approving the whole or es in all the towns mentioned, except Oakpart of the levy. Neither certificate was so wood, were the same as the objections to itemized, and the amendment of the record such taxes in the towns of Catlin and Newof the meeting of the highway commission- ell passed on by this court in People v. er and board of auditors, made at the hear- Wabash Railway Co. (No. 16570) 147 N. E. ing of the objections, could not, in the na- 455, in which the court held the county court ture of things, afford the county board the erred in permitting the levies to be amended information which the statute prescribes as to Catlin and Newell townships and in should be submitted to it for its considera- | rendering judgment for the taxes. Following tion of the levy-a duty which necessarily precedes the extension of the tax by the county clerk. Appellant's objections to the road and bridge taxes of the towns of Catlin and Newell should have been sustained. The judgment of the county court is affirmed as to the town tax of the town of Danville, but with reference to the road and bridge taxes of the towns of Catlin and Newell it is reversed.

Affirmed in part, and reversed in part.

(316 Ill. 458)

PEOPLE ex rel. OLMSTED, County Collector,
v. CHICAGO & E. I. RY. CO.
(No. 16604.)

(Supreme Court of Illinois. April 24, 1925.)
Highways 127 (3)-County clerk held au-
thorized to extend tax rate from a fraction of
a cent to a cent.

Where levy of road and bridge tax, certified by highway commissioner was 422 cents on

that case, the levies in those townships, and in Pilot and Jamaica townships, for road and bridge purposes, must be held void, and the judgment of the county court erroneous.

We held in the same case, on the same objections, that the levy for the tax for the town of Danville was valid, and the court rightly rendered judgment for that tax.

The objection to the road and bridge tax of the town of Oakwood was that the levy certified by the commissioner was 42% cents on the $100, and the county clerk extended the tax at the rate of 43 cents. This action of the Revenue Act (Smith-Hurd Rev. St. of the clerk was authorized by section 128 1923, c. 120, § 116). St. Louis, Alton & Terre Haute Railroad Co. v. People, 224 Ill. 155, 79 N. E. 664.

The judgment of the county court is affirmed as to the road and bridge tax for the town of Oakwood and for the town tax for the town of Danville. The judgment is reversed as to the road and bridge taxes for

For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes

the towns of Newell, Pilot, Jamaica, and | ty court of that county for judgment and orCatlin.

PEOPLE ex rel. OLMSTED, County Collector, road company's property for $1,238.34, and

Appeal from Vermilion County Court; W. In both cases of People v. Cleveland, CincinJ. Bookwalter, Judge.

Ralph Rouse and Rearick & Meeks, all of not so itemized, and the amendment was Danville, for appellant.

[3] But appellee argues that appellant did not properly raise in the trial court the question of the sufficiency of the certificate upon which the county clerk extended the road and bridge tax. Appellant's objection stated that the highway commissioner had attempt

For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes

(147 N.E.)

Appeal from Vermilion County Court; owner and his contractor to construct fire esWalter J. Bookwalter, Judge.

For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes