, 1873-07-12
Tic Suspension Of tho Issuance Of
lax Deeds for City
Property.
At tho Desire Of tic City Counsel, Tic
County Clerk Applies for Uuil-
ancc to tho Attorney
General,
Who Politely But Firmly Declines to
Commit Himself in 80 Deli
cate O Matter.

tax-tiools to polaonB who hnve purchased land
in Cook County (including tho City Of Chicago)
at tax BaloB wloro such persons hnve no other ov-
idonco Of ownership than certificates Of Bao; 1lrg-
ing In justification OF his so refusing, that he laa
nothing to guarantee him against any conBo-
quencos that might ariao from tito using Of an
improper deed. Tie is required by tho Inv to
ascertain from tho records, boforo iseuing . tux
deod, that thoro has been no redemption. Tho
records Of tho city tax salos having
boon destroyed by tho grcat fro, ho il
unable to ascertain from them tllat there has
Boon no redemption, and 1lo is firm in
law can bu found.
Thcro has boon aome uncasineaB Mt tllia state
OF at1airH, and purchasers Of tax-doln1uont roat
estate have threatened tho Clerk With actions.
a. reporter OF THE TntNUNE waited OIL tho Clerk
yesterday, to learn from him what lo intendcd
dong, WHOM ho produced tho following corre-
sp0ntonee:
Joseph I'o'tak. County Clerk:
yo for deeds upon alleged tux BatcH ado hy tho city
~ tie year A. D. 1871 and belieytng TINT tho opinon
March, 1875 was not intended to apply to other than
ahleB for STATE county, and town taxes dcBro bcforo
ss S e tai sss ht
presdss rha tho eose.or sha nj MAKO K i roturn ass;
Collector, shall bo kopt In tho onico Of tho
a ali reasonable nss M" a.id rseor or coes
thereof costaed by said Cnmptroer, sall bo decllcd
ocr for teses @ s 9s or any ohcr
fact authorized o 10 recorded theren" This is tho
ony {d1 Of ne 9w the city,
precept Of tho Collector rarneI 10 tha Court, and
the Comptroller, and oil tho records Of tho
comrtroie1 concerning; tue same, were destroyed
oallceor otlco ware ao then Destroyed, 80 that tluro
is no written evidence Of o. coneorning tho sale, Ok
to Ds issued by The City coector Would It bo nroper
record evidence wtatever of tho fact Of salo7 Can
officer, without parsonn1 knowledge Of the T. -, and
without record evidence Of tho aalc asuo Coed Boloy
upon . certificate of sale. ~hon tie la- makea tho
sulritnt evidence 70 provo Tie fuct ii =! =
CHICAGO, Juno II, 1879 NJ. +. Tu1EY.
Hon. G. +. Lippincott, auditor Public Accottnts:
DEAH STR: Enclosed you will find certified copy Of
Corporation ooanae City Of Chicago, y' Il ei reis.
willing TO d. Tho ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS opinion 81
county sales Is sinilnr to tis for the "jndg-
mont reeora, rrecsps and return OF sales, a!so tho
It Ia truO TINT tho county cnn nt any tnD procure
purposes BY application at your oicc wh!lo the city
their record Of sales. dit where caucei ationu or
Kedempons" cannot be shown and the orig i,a err
purchaser, ia it not Mt least fair to pros,m that
redemption bad not bekn made an TINT it had 1u any
lad received hs redemption money II deeds arc
not Issued then, wlat ateps alo buyers to ko to
their claims absolutely null and void upon failur to
tnke ont deeds within certain time. ileaso IN snor
Ct or earliest convenience and ol!ss yours res1,ect-
CHICAGO, June IL, 1873.
The State Auditor simply declined to incur tho
responsibility Of advising in the matter, and ro-
forred to the Attornoy-General for an opinion,
from whom tho County Clork yesterday received
letter simply declining. politely aud firmly, to
give m opinion, and the matter there ata,,dy.
Poilak said TINT ho Ind offered certain parties
who. wore prominent in desiring him to issue tax
deeds, to agroo upon case to submit to any
the question at onco and forever. In going so
far ho considered he had done as much as any
man who had proper regard for t1e interests
committed to his charge could do,
The reporter aalod what ho should do NOW
that ho had received roply from tho Attorney
General refusing to give an opinion III tho mat-
ter.
Tho clorA naid l.e should not bndgo from the
position lle had takon from tho first. The law
directed him most. plainly what no was to DO.
He was to find by tho records whethor
ne uos apoSty o tac hda been oo reae0med nc or
y tAA AGoN VI tHG AukApAlkt VI d C6ILluCHl4 u
Halo in thu absonco Of tho record, and 1t after
wards appeared that the property had been in
duo form Of law rodoemed. 1t was very we'll to
pitch into tue Clork but who Was going to pro-
teut the Clerk from litigation, afterwards
Tho reporter snid tEoro could be no difficulty
as to Tux Halcs outside the city. The County
records were cnIneatable.
Tho Olork acquieBced. His remarks had moth
ing to do with county salos. The records could
be got at but with tue city records it WAS differ
ent.
Tho reporter naked whethor buying city lands
Boll for taxes waB to coaao, hencef0rwaral, be-
cause the records had boen burned, or whether
tho Clorl, or anyone else had anything to pro-
pose.
The Clerk thought he had done all lie conld.
Ho should refuse to iHBuo tax-doodB unloBs he
could find by the record that tito property Ind
not boon redeemed. II thoro was no such
record, Ao should issue no tax leed. Heha av
for this, but not for giving deodR on tho produc
tion OF certificates. Tho question rwas, not
whothor man had purchased pieco Of land at
tax salo, and received certificate of such
Halo, but whether tho delinquent owner hud
redeemed it afterwards according to law. lie
didnot propose to so clouding tho peoples titles
In that reckloaB why. ue had offered to agreo
on case, and tho offor had boon refused. He
was Still open to agree on case but, it it
could not DO settled that way, they might Huo
him, aud lot them fire away a. Hoon mud as much
al they liked.