The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1872-03-30
gttaiDa Frst GRADER 6
Ottawa. .ri.. SATURDAY., March 30, 1872.
The Sweeley Case.

With the main facts in the case of Mrs.
.Sl-oety vs.. Tie city. 81 Ottd,oa, most of our
readers are already acquainted, Mrs. Sweeley
was afflicted with paralysis in her right hand.
She came TO Ottawa and placed herself under
the treatment of Dr. Olin. The Doctor ap-
piled the galvanic battery to her limb gave
her strong nerve stimulants, like strychnine,
and in a lew days the woman was able again
slightly To use her hand About this time,
passing the corner of Main and Court streets,
Gin front of MONEYS clothing storey she
stepped upon a piece of plank in the sidewalk
which gave way under her feet and she fell,
striking the sidewalk with the afflicted arm
near the elbow, as to produce slight ex-
trayasation or redness under the cuticle On
reporting this fact to DR.. DIN, he told her the
fall ended ali hope of the recovery of the use
of her hand SO far as his skill could go, and
at his suggestion, it is said, she commenced
suit against the city for damages.
The suit was taken, by change of venue, to
Grundy county, and tried year ago, resulting
in a verdict for $500 against the city. A new
trial was granted the city on the ground that
the damages were excessive, and that new trial
took place last week, resulting in second
verdict against :Le city tor $500.
1t was proved on the trial, by the opinion
of six or eight tirst-cass physicians that the
slight use the woman had received of her
hand under the treatment of DR.. DIN was the
result of the strong nerve stimulants he
had administered, and could in any case only
have been temporary; that her case was be-
You'd surgery and that the fall IN no way in
fluenced the subsequent increase Of her all
ment. 1t WAS also proved that, when the
defect in the sidewalk occurred the city au-
thnrites had called the attention OF Mr. Moo
ner.to it, who had raised the depressed plank
to its place by driving stake under 1t, but it
appears had done the the work imperfectly.
ItshoWcd, however that there had been no
negligence on the part of the city in the mat
ter. Under these facts, any verdict except for
nominal damages, would seem to be clearly
unjust. motion for new trial has again
been entered, and is now pending.
Aside from the pecuarities of the case it.
sell, It strongly illustrates the hard condition
in which Ottawa is at present placed. Here
Is jury ready to impose heavy penalties on
the city for what in realty was but construc.
tive neglect to keep her sidewalks in perfect
condition, while the Legislature has actually
deprived the city of all power to build or re.
- II pl,.
power Of the city to so cents on the ST. which
barely yields enough to pay the interest on
her Indebtedness and keep the machinery of
her oca! government IN mott m, and has de-
pri"ed her OF the power to order lot owners to
build sidewalks, or TO build sidewalks by
special assessment on the property benefited
What is The city to do? For the past two
years, clearly, she was helpless. The law
sidewalks, but took from her the power to
improve them. For the future, however, her
case is a little better. law Just passed by
the Legislature authorizes the city to double
the city few thousand dollars for the 1ext
year TO be expended on sidewalks. But W hat
in city needing ten miles Of new sidewalk
can five or even ten Thousand dollars do?
The State FAIR will be here in September
and we want our city in at least prescntablt
condition to be seen by the vast crowds then
to visit us. How is this to be done 1t can onl,
be done by the lot owners themselves taking
the matter in hand and building the side
walks. Without a manifestation of publi,
spirit and berallty in that direction, there il
no hope, at present. for good sidewalks il
Ottawa.