, 1873-04-12
Singular Proceedings Against the
Oity---Extraordiuary Prose-
p: J., .oution Of d Citizen.
4 Curious Will Case---A Chicago Es.
tate Claimed by an Indiana
Widow and Child.
Some Allegations Respecting the Lake
Superior Forwarding Com
pany. 49,.
Penalty Of Letting MI Infected .1lonse-.-
:Dnn,agcs FOR Loss of Wife
and Child.

anu ChliNs
Tile supromo Court OF thiB State, By Scott,
Justice, has doli7ored tho following opinion IN
Joseph a. Kline Y. the Town OF Reatling (Appeal
from Livngntoue):s
Com1n.aa!onera 81 Higawaye 'lhc Town Of Reading
6 T. ssss " aaT "
y h0 ",g as a roa tho
prayed nmarrea1 nndsr tho provisions of tho statute
1sG cr ., e n I'll
tho nshekB.ncnt Of dahngcH which tho nppellnnt would
Batain by Of tho Of tho road acrota
B ta1t! IN this respect tho action Of tho Commits
Ripnors was rarersed and 1lew asscsan,ent made.
The record Of tho proceedings waa brought before tho
tho Court found no or1or and dismissed tho ca,,Re
Tho proceedings having been instituted since tho
fasea We ef TN b. eoacred %
commissioners Of 1gllway3, the s'lpcrslsora, On
appeal could 1ghttuy assesa tho daaEca which tho
urpcuant would 81stnin by reason Of the construction
Of tho road acroBs hia lrcmfses. Tho principal IN
qury therefore, IL wloher tho statutes under which
aSseid s" seid II tic thrieeath section oi xrliso
nsSSa 3Ssa or that ,,saed "Tas for pS ase nc @
ont just compensation. sneh compensatIon,
s net p1 s Jury b Il ss III o sss ssssped al sy
plainly in conflict with .hts provision q tho Co..
Mltu n 10 ~ IIin,,,rova nr tIn Hnneryisora on
nr"ni tn nrsrea 1omnScs 10 have beeu renpalel, or
npS - ,nnnnrolro ~ tc nontion Of tho Cons
tim. Tho land OF tho appellant cousn Iok ~ @ Son-
1Gr IL ngoxei Vic Tint sch compensation gha
Go nsceriaincd by Jury It does not lniitao against
this y'ow shat tnero W. 'ac sa ~ rn,satn nv
iury It ia constitutional right which tho party
naay not 30 2eeagEea either ey 1 thq ae1oa, q noh
arssol a,:ss son,on,h"r. ~ 1Mu r fis1o1 =.
rho thirteenth section Of the Dill Of Rights VI w9a IN
foseo o. tno tao tncso re- a ns rr ~ tbo nnnc
Int II tGo public sought to conlon t,a property for
public ''scp 10 haXo hs damages ~ 1}io
a snorraors on oppoa wore without auhor
ty oi law, and therefore voi1 Tho town officers could
hayo 10 wtu slgn 70 Gh.es sa1o to nnb1I uses up
lis damages ahosld layo becn uscortalncd according
10 lis law d the and and such damages pad Or ten-
dored to h'n T. was 30 Ae'a Ill sno ceso u IL" fo''
S1sloberS snrrn' ot.r,n,u, ,vbo,ner thu statute
IS !n ui9sessy ssos3 urocaejoa wore lad made any
sE nroxso n!''f r.. asecraning Is jury sho umagcs
yhir, In a1pelIant would susta by tic construction
S r. nis o IN i is
tom nsay 10 aasessaned ss py jury ee: -
A1%n o X Gdmmssfouers Of Highways nor tho
l saprrsiaors hail any authority, undsr tho law, to
pa would susta snd tnSg aS,iSn ] II "a ta va eeen
Saa aIfeEainr f.. .', ana G1sc,t fp, nn,,,r ~
The i,gment Is reversed and tho rcnaudcd.
Charies J. Nsatsie for appellant, nnd Pillshury and
SINGULAR n1r.1t ron INJUNCTION AGAINST THE
",|'~~ c,rv.
.,u ,r;,,aa n rot,,or macmillan anil.
Ya'ontHe heas erausa .a,'t'' ., 49,, - ch,nn'
70. Complainant avors that in the carly pnrt Of
the wear 1s72 his wifo was owner of lot on which
1890 ao ~ 20 Nort,, Walls atroot ia built tia
noaso ~ Wv saaa1 ona ,rns srcct6d onrlv ir
tho samo yenr, an1 is within tho city nro limits
thnt nj Lho limo IT way built thoro woro left opo1
49,, tyo noi,s of stairs In tho rear
':.,' M tos1os ;,roaa md errcss to t1,o aeconi
which Afforded 1hgreaa euo agtsha ~ sno nose.
and third stories that tIo houso was oul41 pi,o
to tho adoption of the ordinance to designate th'
l,oun1ary Of tho new tro limits Of Chicago; tia
t,,a stairs woro only protected by Btulding OK
tae heta o,'tso Msd o9 t1em aid atfachod tlSrot,
tonnnF saot h;oi,ar t1nn aaid staira. for til.
Aolna u nto,t13. 1on, tI,at on tla 29d
PURPOSE " Ho IT, op,r'nn Gn1nc n cl,irart
;ausnI ,, 2C,,5 adonnd IN ordinanco providing tha
"tno o"noe @ " nro1,fpod JIip from ~ ronairini
building mas ,IE;h1;,,e Et91n,pA'o0 or cnlarenr til
hny "ou:lu .:ti'!,,, ti,o firm 1inoita ia m
nau o1tcnt ahoyo or hcor than ono story, and that
ios Yol!lol ,, ,,o,aa,, ,cIo ni"1 or assistol
oceupor or any pets9u WY o naoq " ~ las" TN
tho same as baSSs Enn - ~ tat c - - not tho owne
occupant of sch oul4H sas IS e Il
tho buildings erection nor ~ nta nan, n.ty ~ ltI y
atlons AefGon LINZ 1a7s ~ shG hs ifcr r onpoyt
month Of reorsal!, to'o n,g VIZ no;,ed ro,e
: rough workman, MAo eiiY nt1aea w. s,aira aua
+ boartls on .ho stuaag 70 rtotce. o o aa %,
the rear Or tho ~. na omn enn' nTnHnev Mo vi
aupcrlntenalng tno 3on "1f' c"mo uu to thn Snili1
claims to 20 Ilto Mafaem Gn'u ,Sa ~ ;natod r +
~ md in most H'iGo'tlemany way tn i,ta1, to N
because ahe sna snG VIZ aui io,,aRed vii
ora a ,ai H. sn% ou1d % Ieop On sng until
II tno 1lseas t!at t,,o' nu NIL oxyn atc vlola
- - would maze trc!n IL tA 4sth a9" Navel, 1a7a Il
thing anas on otnn 10 'osM n1,inat cnmniainar
guy 9!ouha1 n,';t,n,, ,rI3n fned lin ssoE
ii ,;afnt,on ~ thn f1ro nrnnncn: thnt on tho 20
10 " H. nnn,a mont, tho city brought tlroo 9th
10 on,ta @ fnr t1,o uono offcnao: tint On tho 9TH d
nttsn s,,r tho cify hrolrhE similar suit for
10 % oa,aa 1iysrsc II tno Woat Side Police Court
or fou fora Justice sen1y, who lno complainant $40
70 that tllo oity served no prooesa on him., cxco
In t!le first instance, whom summons WhB Il
With lis little cllild tlat said tinos assosaod
co,ltrary to law, una TINT said suits are ci