, 1873-10-07


ncse Of recovering just what thoy cost Cnsl,tnan
Il Hardin, and they Bny thnt a,lo}. purchases Of
policies havo accrued to tho benefit OF tho otllor
stookho!dors ah we'll as tl,en,aelvcs.
Ihny ftrther say that III all their transactions
nnd dealings with tho Company prior to tho tinlo
ltH affairs passed into tho hands of tho Comn,t-
teo, they acted In good fnith, nnd with view 10
@ t;onohs ttie Company and its atockhoitlors, ind
that al thoy havo dono slnee tho great fro VIM
advantage Of tho other stockholders Of thu said
Company.
They admit liability as stockholders upon $50
esfes sst ,l Of tue stock Of to Company, bit deny
% he n m a1 dS 1hsr en espee a 's rep ee
denies oil the equites Of the bill 90 Tar ~ they
nre concerned, and stntce Tint tho bill wnB
caused to DO filed hy i. 4. Wilson, not for tho
purpoae Of bonoi'ting ,complananta or other
money himaelt out OF tho litigation.
DAMAGES FOR MAKING WASHINGTON HTnEET TUN-
MEL
On tho 90 Of January laet, Horace T. White
Chicago. claiming $l5, 900 damages, md yostcr-
day aftor lapso Of nine mo1,tfs, l.e las fled bin
tiec1arntiop setting out lli1 cause Of notion. This
nla'n1sit claims that In 1872 Lie was tAe owner OF
Of Chicago, being No. 222 Ensk Washington
atreot. ?'horn Ind nevor been map or plat Of
said original town recorded, Oh required by law.
and hanco the city had mover acquired tho foo to
% ha'a ~, washington street. w plaintiff had rleht
subart nn1v "nu unooHlausun a., at use .hofeot
sS'}bos 3 " Gns 70 an easement III n favor
bnildtngs erected thoreon wore worth $4,000
more. Tho city unlawfully dug tho entrance to
thus .ono et aug efectea @ etoho arcway thoro
atnro o,a .ap ssroes GoloIo paint'1s
means Of thia, ho lost the rent Of his store, al
ne ohima, for year, and has Hince boon Obliged
to lowor bis rents, aud his promises hayo been
srcyfor h eara auS aH1 nm III Vao
1aeGsr u ill Sis asal%st tic city for damages
Ghnraa nd'g nminIsgn 'no ,,o ounno, Mas ied by
inuru5sa Mos kio anu zxo washington stroet.
Ia.a'sly n.;nia au1olnns tnoao oWned oy White.
pttuoo yoas, aau thinks ~ he has been damaged
~ '1o ea'oas VI soo.ool.
+ /, LIN biLn ::I ~ QUIET TITLE
~. ~ pAi 70 qutes lilo mas meg in the Superior
Y 1fnan1neey !; Z, Bowen, Edward Mickey, William
-. - Mohey lhonas =. Mehoy, George n. Mo-
hpy, atla harriet AlcAey, t1e Inst four Of whom
n99,ng s.9ng mnofa sue ny Henry Mickey their next
iilehu, against Mary Bond, Emily g. Light, FL
port 4. Light, Jay 9. Bond, Judd L. Dont1. and
James 1,a 4. bend. Tho premises in question are
tho cast half Of the northeast quarter of Soc.
81, 80, IL, oxcepting five acres in tho northeast
corner tneroof The fsetA are as follows II
Ootobor, 1867, Edward Mickey and Michael +.
MooiAoy bought tue above promises Of jacob For
ssythe and Robert D. Clark, executors Of George
". Ciarkt deceaeed, md Immediately conveyed
tWo-thtrds thereof to tho BowenB. An abstract
Of title was examined by both parties at the timo
OF purchase, Which eoancd to show D good titlo,
and thoy supposed 1t was porfoct until July.
1871, when bill vas filed BY Emily G. Light
nnd ElbeEt X. Light, to which complairnnts and
sosepha Kohl and ]: J. Minor were mado de~
iohaants. IN Which said Lights claimed titlo to.
SAID premises. Tho records Of tho case wero de-
stfoyed tn tne lire. and it 1s not known whether
II has SINCE been Dismissed. Aftorward, in July,
la7i, said Emily O.. Light and her
mont agaiost Charles 1aooga. tonant
Of complatnanta on the promises, and obtained
Judgment IN Alay, 1572 giving Eloort X. Light
d hle estate Ill one-hfth and h!s wife foe sim
acres in the northeast quarter thereof. 4 new
trinl was asked md granted, aud is now ponding.
BY the aforementioned abstract it appears TINT
iu July, 1862, Lester II. Evarts and Mary Bond,
administrations Of Ezra Bonn, deceased, CON
tho premises in question, and five aores moro.
and compla!nants claim title through thus con-
veyauoo. Ezra Bond became owner by patent
from tho Government. 1n 1877 Bond died, leay-
Ing Mary Bond, his widow, and tlyo children,
who are made defendants, Including Emily Boud,
now Emily Light.
Complaiuahts claim that tho administrators Of
Ezra Bond, to pay tho debts OF deceased, applied
to tho Circuit Court Of oglo to sell the promises
in question; the petition WAS granted, tito pronl-
1908 sola to conp!anantS Grantors for, 30 DID,
and thus good tltlo roBted in them. Tho admin
tatrator's decd cannot DO found, aud IL supposed
to have been lost or burned. johnson conveyed
subsequently to nawHon, and Airs Bond released
to him her dover right and Clark by mesno
conreyancos, derives title from Baid Rawaon.
1n 1871, tho heirs Of Ezra Bond conveyed all
claim thAt this conveyance was only colorado to
to givo the Lights show OF title toenable them
to suo, md tlat they hayo no real title,
Between 1866 and 1871, q. K. Light WIS for a
long time clerk in tho County Court of Ogle
County, and complainants Allege that as the
record OF the ordor OF tho Court to sell tho es-
tate Of Ezra Bond cannot be found,. that said
Z. K. Light has stolen or destroyed it, TINT
he has also destroyed other files concerning
the estate of said Bond, thus Destroying
link In conlplaiuants' title, aud tonding to make
1t appear that tho administrators snlo was uu-
lawful, not being authorized. aud that complain
ants llayo no title. Complaipants also charge
That Z. X. Light abstractod certain filos aud pm
pera md took them to certain lawyers in Chi
cago, BY whom thoy woro destroyed. :.
CompleinantB fear that, by tho Inv, they havo
not sufficient evidence to show good title, md
hence flo their bill asking for discovery by do
tondants OF tho whereabouts Of said Alos, that
their title may bo Quoted, and for an Injunction