The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1848-01-14
TO THE PUBLIC.
The Settlers IiIeelinr,

Inc OetLIGfG' LIGellnG,
The undersigned. who were present auy
+ participated in the proceedings Of the meet
lng Of the settlers ON cana! lands. held NJ the
court house in Ottawa. ON the eth day O.
December, \. II. ISL, deem itduc, rs vii
10 themselves As the public. iuasmuch as the
objects and proceedings of the me citing hay,
been made the subject Of severe and unmcr
tied auimaavegSicn by the public luesS o.
this town, TO present, fer tie consideration
Of those not present az The meeting, true
statement Of facts:
With view to Gi,crcdit the proseeAjgs
Of the meeting it has been represented that
the meeting was shiny attended and that
the resolutions 40 uutcNpTcSS the sentiments
Of the settlers ca canal lands and lots i'm this
town or ON the line Of the canal, both Of
which assertions we en- haucaly deny.
The meeting was well attended, consider
iu- the >hoItlime and limited circulation e
the notice, and WCul! have been much more
numcrously attended u,rc Il nat TIA. iH8c-
fatgah'e eIlrtioES rerc mate ty interested
l.n.riGsaE 10 yr9GH a gcierGi attendance
Of the sFlaT", BIZ disappearing tIe ohjsc'S
OF The meeting. Aud for rcfu,atCM OF the
second charge we have only 10 refer to the
resolutions adopted by the meeting. By
these resolutions We ale content 10 be judy
cd. rlAere is any thing wrong in the po-
>.'ion We lave assumed in relation 10 the
appraisal Of ,hc canal lands, it, surely, will
be an easy 'asl, for those who SO vehcmcu,lv
question lie prop!iCty Of orr course TO point
out the particular resolution to which they
object.
ThepuJl.c are not be TO deceived, or their
attention Withdrawn fromthe resolutions by
tic stale political auil.ce Of raising a collal
oIaI issue upon the motives Of persons,
lmen in bUcAIam) behind TIE screen.
Is it wrong that canal lands and lots
should be appraised with reference ,heIr
10 cash value:
Is !: wrong, or can any possible injury
result TO the state or the holders Of canal
bonds by giving publicity to the apPraisals
aud will it not be- a substantial bene tit to the
settler, by enabling him, the appraised val
tie having been determncd,) either TO sell
or remove his improvements, or prepare
himself in season with the necessary funds
10 purchase his lands?
What motive actuateS the appraisers in
delaying 10 progress with the appraisement?
aud are we wrong in saying in our resolu-
a'i'h - AtlN .+fiN
commenced at the west end of the line, the
consideration Cf economy alone should in
duce them TO appraise in regular order the
whole Of the lands and lots
Are We wrong in saying that the settlers
are interested IN tie appraisal, and are the
appraisers so high III wealth and uilicia!
station that the settlers are To lie denounced
fer respectfully and candidly expressing
their opinions:
But it is said that the appraisers are
srorB.-Wc have heard that some sort of
an cath has been administered at the canal
Office to the appraisers, and have no reason
To doubt the report. We are willing, for
the sake Cfthe argument. to admit that they
have taken the usual official oath, and what
conclusion follows? They are to determine
upon the rights Of The settlers.
Judges and Jurors are also SwOrD. yet the
law gives 10 the parties the right 10 be
head in person orhy counsel. The settlers
have 40 feed attorneys retained TO defend
their cause and they choose 10 advocate in
person their rights. Where is the injuS-
tioc:
i; is further said that names appearin the
proceeding Of the meeting who were not
present at tho meeting, and who discounto
nance il.
This statement we also deny, and call
upon those who have made the charge to
specify the persons whose names appear in
the proceedings who discountcnancCd the
meeting. II any such there are, We are
yet TO lcam the fact, and we are equally ig-
nOrant of tic name Of a single settler upon
canal lands or lots in this vicinity or else
where who does not approve Of the .cso-
buttons adopted 10y tie meeting.
In conclusion NC deny Chat The meeting
originated in any motive of hostility 20 the
appraisers, or any enc ofthcm; ON the con
Iary ;he meeting was called and the roSo-
iutious 01ortcd under firm belief that the
cJ;gHcy called for union and concert Of &c
ton amongst tho settlers upon canal lands
10 protect their Just rights. We believed
that justice to tie appraisers rcqnircs that
The settlers should express their views be-
fore the appraisal was made and not after
the subject had passed from the control If
the appraisers. If we had waited until a'-
ter the appraisal had been completed, of
what use would have been an expression Of
the opinion ofthe settlers unlessto dcnouncc
The appraisers for mn act beyond their pow
CT 20 remedy orrcdrosS.
we ulSaVow Tor ourselves ana inc SctlCfS
present at the meeting, any motivcSui hos
iili,y TO the appraisers, unless they are pre-.
pared to admit that in making the appraisal
the just rights and interests Of the settlers
vii! be dsrcgarged and sacrificed to pro-
mote the interests Of the ,cealihV specuidior.
JOSEPH AVERY, Chairman,
PATRICK LAMB, Secretary,
MAURICE MURPHY, } Committee
JOHN KENNEDY, on
1900 resolutions