The Rock Island daily Argus. [volume] (Rock Island, Ill.) 1872-1873, 1873-03-24
IReUMENrs IN THE FERRY CASE.

Will INV Wy " give INC pCoPiS "
account OF the case, though the limit TO
the SPACE we can spare for the case will
permit only a mere alusion to the points,
the whole arguments of the five lawyers
having occupied two days and one evening.
VIM. Fl. Gest ESD, opened the case on
Friday, in a able argument for the people
carefully and concisely covering the whole
ground and making all the points in the
case which were afterwards discussed.
r. T. McNeal, Esq, of the law firm Of
Connolly 4 McNeal, followed, on Saturday
forenoon, in a speech Of over four hours,
for the Ferry Co, making a mastery and
lawyer like effort for his clients Every
thing he said had point in it, and he was
apparently, fully prepared on every point
except as to the ccnstitutionality OF the
ferry charter and that, he said, and 1t was
apparent from his remarks he had not
considered at all
IT McElherne, Esq. city attorney
followed Mr.. McNeal, in the afternoon, IN
an argument Of an hour and a half, in
whi,h he thoroughly and fully reviewed
the question Of police power, as exercised
bv the State. in regard to all corporations.
/ He showed that this power had been given
to the people of this city, by the legisla-
ture acting for the people Of the State,
and that the City Council, as the only
proper and legally constituted represcta-
tive Of the people, had the right to exer-
else this power, either by ordinance or
through the Harbor Master; and that the
people by their representative, the City
Council were the judges of public neces-
sity and public convenience, and the well
being of the interests Of the city-and not
the Ferry CO. He also reviewed the bill
filed by Spencer 4 Robinson, answering 1t,
paragraph by paragraph, in a clear con
else and practical manner.
VIM. Jackson, Esq, Of the law firm Of
Sweeney 4 Jackson, followed. i'll ram
bling, disjointed speech Of two and half
hours As an effort to present to a court,
in lawyer-like way, the points in the case,
aud the law as applicable to the points, the
speech seemed to US a failure He at
tempted 10 show
l. That the title of the act for the re
lief Of the heirs and assigns of John Vii
sa, deceased, VS. q compliance with the
constitutional requirement that no private
or local bin should be passed embracing
more than one subject, and that its title
should embrace the subject Of the bill.
He claimed that it was bill for relief,
etc. etc. inasmuch as it renewed or eX.
tended their ferry charter and relieved
them in that respect And he claimed
that the heirs and assigns Of John Wilson
we're the proper judges of public necessity
aud convenience, as to the landing place
etc, because they constituted part Of thu
public and their interests were identlca
with the interests of the public
.. That the act authorizing ferry wa
constitutional under its title, because
would Of itself provoke inquiry into it
provisions etc etc.
He ram5led over a great deal Of ground
cited numerous authorities most Of then
irrelevant and pointless for any purpose o
the Ferry Co.-and he talked, is j
seemed to Us. against time and about
great many things which can never fgur
at all in the mind of q court. To Us. j
looked a little bit like trying to take up :
much time that Mr.. Osborn would nece-
sarily be curtailed il his closing argument
Some Of his remarks would have bee
quite plausible and effective with a jury
but were wholly ont Of place to a coug
having a knowledge of law. and deaidiu
cases only upon the law Il, it exists. ]
was eviden, that the ferry company feare
: the closing argument of Mr.. Osborn, an
wished to crowd ii into as limited q period
time as possible, knowing that it must b
. made that night,as Judge Peasants was t
leave for Mercer county on Monday.
C. NJ. Osborn, Esq. of the law firm
Osborn & Curtis, closed the case, in abol
an hour and half making, in his preci;
. and clear way, five points viz
l. That the city charter provides thu
the City Council may, by ordinance
! through the Harjor Muster, decide whel
the ferry shall land and change that Ian,
. ing place. from time to time, as necessit
=. or public convenience may require TIL
the Council has and mad a Wharf Maste
and by ordinance had prescribed his d.
ties that the notification which he gay
the Ferry Company was conclusive, al
that he had the discretionary power 10 i
d dictate and had indicated the place for Il
v ferry to land that the resolution Of Il
; City Council was merely directory to Il
Harbor Master, and not at all necessar
u either as an ordinance or in any 9TH
way, In support of this position he re;
all of Division ~ Of Section 4 of Artic
~ Of the city charter showing that Il
meaning and purport Of the charter vi
that the city might control the place
landing, independently Of an ordinance
c and by ordinance might compel the pc
r. sons using the leyee to pay the expense
i removal if they refused to obey the b
+ nests of the Council
}. > That the Legislature had invest
h and left with the City Council all pOwe
as to the ferry and all other matters as
1t the landing Of all boats, crafts or foat
u etc This was proven by the time VIII
1t the acts were passed the provision {
l. recting the ferry to land where the pu
10 lie convenience should require being
W the ferry charter passed in January ISL
j. and the act giving the discretion to t
10 City Council as to what the public conve
Is fence did or might require being passed
5 the February following. He said that
was an admitted principal and rule Of |,
II that the last will of the Legislature &c
erned.
3. That where discretion was left
. any corporation or person, as the disc
ID ton was left in this case to the City Coz