, 1873-04-26
Contamination of the Trial Be-
fore, Judge Williams. '
More Testimony Regarding tho ELECT
of Extension on Adjoining
Property.
The Farwon Tract .-- Arguments OF
Messrs. Adams and Shorey.

II
That tho offer OF Balo Of tho Farnen traot was
tlrst made to the Park Commissioners, and that
ho has no personal interest In that tract. Tho
diminution Of park frontage by tho extenalon
amounted to about q 400 foot. .r
On ss-o1amiuntion by Mr. Bhorey, witness
statod that no gavo his individual noto tor
e100 900 In payment for tho FarHcll tract. There |
is no w1itton agroomont between witnoss and tho |
Lincoln Park Commissioners, but ho had e1- |
pocted that such IN ngreement would be exc |
cutod, WitneBs was asked concerning the nogo- |
ttons for tho purchhae Of tho Milliman tract.
Mr, Jowett objected to tho testimony, and tho |
objection Was sustained.
10 Mr., Jowott, Mr. Culver explained the CIV |
Ing Of his noso for tho Farwon tract. It trans- |
prod TINT tho Park Commissioners had no power |
to undertake such d payment, and 40 Witnoas
took the <naponait'ility ora hima"ls, holding !
tnd property in trust for tho Park Commits
sion. u,
Judge Trumbull-Then 1t mas Echcmo to
dodge the provisions Of tho law.
Mr. Culvor-1t WAS O plan whereby this prop
erty could be secured for the park.
Judge Trumbull- you had no right to ne-
euro 1t undor tho lazy, and you resortcd to this
echome to avoid tho Inv.
In reply to Mr. shoroy, Mr.. Culver stated thnt
be did not know how many lota iii the old ceme-
terry were owned by private parties.
Z. D. McCngg testified that thoro WAS nevor
any organization under tho aotof 1867, providing
for Park Commission. Nothing was dono, and
no monoy was spent. Prior to tho organization
of tho Lincoln Park Commission, MI tho i'm
proyementB 1nado woro under the direction of the
city authorities. Property in North Chicago and
Lako Wow had boon largely enhanced by tho I'M
provomonts in Lincoln Park undcr tue scvernl
LAWS. Property which before bud q park 'front.'
ago is not 80 much benefited by tho proposed
extension aa is property which thereby gains a.
parls frontage. 49,.
In reply to Judge Trumbull, tho witnosB Hatd
that not . dollar iyaB over oxponded BY the city
in improving TINT portion Of Lincoln Park lying
north Of the Newborry and Foster TRACTS. Mr.
Hoolwillie's property would bo largely benohtod
by tho proposed extension.
To Mr.. Jowett, witnoss stated that tho Valuo
of Mr.. Thompaon's property would be enormous
ly increased by tho park extension.
with real estate values in North Chicago and
Lake Wow. In 1864 m appropriation OF SIC, 600
was mado by tho Common Council for tho iln-
provomcnt Of q portion Of tho city cemetery.
Property in Lake View has boon quadrnpled in
value by tho extension and enlargement Of tho
park under tho aevoral park acts. Mr.. Goodwill
iio's md Mr. ThSo}mpaon's property would bo
'H Rnhert dark testified that there aro not 20
| many brewerieB in the vicinity Of Mr. Good
| villies.property rs tlero woro before tho fro.
| That property would not DO benefited by tho
park ontenaion. His Wright's Grove property
" Thia 81 closed tRe toatimony in the caso on both
| edos. -......-..
Francis Adams, Esq, opened the argument for
tho plaintiffs, discussing tho objections made by
Judge Trumbull and Mr. shorey. Tie first OBJ
toctfon Of tho latter waB based on the fact that
tho taw did not provide for I'LL asaossnont in pro-
portion to tho benefits derived He denied this
. -3..I. = T. -knk~, ,~f,An
Visions by which he waa sustained. The point
had bcon settled by decisions in for1nor caaes In
the case OF Goodwillie and Thompson, who
/ claim tianagos by tho park extension, tho bur-
Judgment Of tho AAsosrment Board. Tho testi-
mony Of the Aesossora was that tho property
would DO greatly benefit by the proposed OK
tension. The samo fact WAS testified to BY NJ.
showed that the objection vaa not we'll ta1ten.
In answer to the objection Of Judge Tru1nbul1.
ho would say that the .asscssmont was mado un,
der SEQ. Of tho Park ac, which provides that
whiol shall bo mado In proportion to the bope
fta conferred As to tho question OF
tho jasiadietion Of g. n;s,,,. the c9art @nt hS thS
Original jurisdiction in al cascs Of tho nature Of
that undor discussion. Tho County Court had
concurrent but not exclusive, juriaaiction ;
therefore tho proceeding vas properly brought
/ |
: tho Circuit court had no Jurisdiction was good
then Of necessity tho Court had no jurisdiction
in casos Of hhbeaB CORPUS, mandhmus and casos
relating to revenue The speaker ceod aoyora
Tho objection that the .park act of June 1G,
1861, although general in lis terms, waH practic.
ally 'amendatory to prior acts concerning lin.
coin Park, and that, therefore, such prior acta Q,
inaertod In THO now act, could not bo sustained
, Tile new net waa not nuondatory In itB oilarac
ter, though such might bo its effect. In orde1
to lnnko It atnendntory 1t would be necessary t
this would render Legislation practically i'm
. possible. Tho judiciary Committees Of OH
;. State Senate and House hayc recognized thii
important fact, md havo adopted tho rule Q
, ingorting only tho new act, thus doing aWay will
q useless repetition. The net undor discussion
yas not special III It's provinionB,-it applied t.
all localities and NIL Park Commissions: in th
State. The nBsoaBment ia alGo objected to bo
,, thoritisa OF tho towns Of North Chi
i cngo and Lako View. or other O
! them, nho, alono, under tho Constitution, col
! DO yehtod with powor to make improvements y,
r special asseesmentB because, If said HuporyiB
orB aud AHaeBsors could 30 regarded as tic cor
I porato authogitieB Of thoir respective towns
! thoy had no authority to act conjoittty In reh
ing tho assonsmont; because sho pommsoonor INN
q fe o ooaso @ s1n
t fLako Wow, who alono can bo empowered ts
mako improvements. -.
Mr.. AdamB continued, that the not provided
however, that the aaBeasmont shall bo mado b.
r tho Supervisors and Assessors Of North Chicago
and Lake Wow. Ihoao authorities wore legal
elected with thoir own consent after the paBsag
of the act reforrod to, and probably with specia
reference to their individual ability to carry out IL
provisions. The authoritog OF tho two town
:, agreed upon tho asaoHsment to be loyicd, and t,
= tiin an objection had been raigod. But llos
y could the towns DO injured by Tho concurrent &C
tion OF their corporate authorltios In this matter
:, The improvement wns ono In which the distric
!, of North Chicago and Lake Viow-a district Gro
! atea by tho Park act---was Interested, and j
could not bo claimed that tho corporate authorl
tiog Of either wero not corporate authoritios 0
i tho dlRtrict when they made tho assessment. I'll
n assesBment by tho corporate authorities Ut Lal
Wow upon Lake View property, acting under til
act, cai1not be Ytiated BY tho fact that tho cor