The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1868-05-09


Of The County, towa or city, but, on the contrary
the county: town er sity appear TO s' the mere
agents of tho comnissiohers
They arc the only persons authorized by the
act TO determine the amslnt OF money to be ex,
pended in the construction of these bridges, the
location Of the same and the kind Of bridges TO
be constructed.
The act does not give to the town or city su-
thorities, or 10 the people Of the town or city,
any voice whatever IN relation TO these matters,
although they are important questions to the
large majority Of the people who have to pay the
tax and the value of whose propertysh at all, is
very remotely benefited by the construction Of
the bridges.
It is true, that il the matter had been left to
the people Of the town or city. they might not
have located the bridges on the streets where
the commissioners located them. People may
have different views about bridges. Some of the
persons who think the public interests would be
very mach advanced by the construction of sew
eral costly bridges across the canal, consider it
absolutely prepssterous for the people of the 7th
ward to ask for a narrow sidewalk along the 1lli-
nois river bridge, as to allow safe passage for
persons on foot.
Itmay also be noticed that the date of the act show
it was passed 1T very nearly the close of the sess
ion of the Legislature, and the persons who drew
up the act and sent it TO the Legislature entirely
forgot to inform any else of the people of the
town Of the action in this regard, and then en-
tirely debarred the great majority Of the people
OF the town from making any representations to
the Legislature, or Of being heard in regard to
the matter; and the fact that such an act had
been passed was not known until long after the
adjournment Of the legislature.
The commissioners proceeded to locate the
bridges and directed the Board Of Supervisors to
levy tax of about twelve thousand dollars up
on.the town OF Ottawa to defray the expenses of
constr ucting the bridges. The board, at the Sept
term, 1867, levied the tax and directed the coun-
ty clerk TO extend the same upon the collectors
book for the town of Ottawa A.E
The city Council, hearing of the action of the
commissioners, and believing said act and
ths manner in which its passage was obtained to
be gross imposition upon. the majority Of the
people Of the city, about the first of October 1867
ordered the city authorities 70 take the aecss-
sary legal steps to test the validity of the tax.
Accordingly . bill in chancsry in which the
city Of Ottawa and number of citizens were par
ties was prepared fer that purpose and an appli
cation made Judge McRoberts of Joliet for
writ OF injunction to restrain the county clerk
the tax upon the collectors book the hearing Of
whish application was to take place on the I'd
Of November.
In the meantime company had been formed
for the purpose Of manufacturingglass and had
located their glass works near the place where
one OF the bridges had been located.
On the strenuous application of members of the
glass company a majority of the council voted to
rescind the order previously passed for the pur.
pose of testing the validity of the tax.
The application for an injunction was made
by several citizens of the city, but the applica-
ton was denied by reason of the last named Or
der Of the city council. - = = AZ .4ft
IL -, x-,~ Al Al IL -
resembling the order made as aforesaid for the
purpose OF testing the validity of the tax furnish
es vsrv strong ground for insisting that the city
council did by such action vote to receive the
bridges when they should be properly construct
ed, 20 that they could be easily opened for the
passage Of boats and 30 that the bridges would
last as long a., we'll constructed bridges of the
same kind in other towns and cities ordinarily
last although some of the aldermen, who voted for
resembling said order, claim that by such vote
they intended only to desist from; opposing the
tax end leave the matter as it stood before any
steps were taken by the city council to test the
validity of the tax, and did not suppose that by
such action, they had incurred any liability on
the part OF the city to receive the bridges.
The commissioners caused the bridges to be
constructed and sent statement to the city
council purporting TO show that the bridges were
finished and that the commissioners wanted the
city to take the bridges.
The city council received this communication
and passed IAN order refusing TO receive the
bridges fer the following reasons:
The council were informed by experienced
bridge builders that. while the superstructure Of
the bridges may be good, the center piers upon
which The bridges rest arc 50 imperfsctly con-
structed as to be useless for bridges which have
to DO opened for the passage of boats, and that if
the city council should assume the bridges and
open them for the passage Of boats it would be
necessary to Immediately remove the present
piers and build new ones of solid masonry rest
ing on the sand rock. This would occasion an
expense ofseveral thousand dollars to raise which
the council would have to submit an ordinance
for another loan to the people of the city. ESQ,
Besides, the council had previously had some
experience in regard to turn bridges and has
found by experimenting with Madison street
bridge that center piers made of crib work and
filled with cobble stone will not answer the pur-
pose. Owing to the great weight Of the bridge
the piers settle unsvenly 50 as to leave the turn
table lower in some places than others and con.
sequently the bridge cannot be turned. a'
Also, it was found that the turn bridge at the
mouth of the feeder, which is also "gift" bridge,
the city having paid $500 towards its construc-
ton, was 40 out Of repair that it could not. be
used. This bridge was built within the last tive
| or three years, and if the center pier had been
properly constructed The bridge would have last.
ed ten or fifteen years and would not now have
to be rebuilt.
Allan IL call %la& A. 49, H., "a.