, 1874-07-27

lows VIZ. tAfer describing Tho nroa to be e,nhraeed
Ta ~n hi toss It'll. Ill M bdg siei
or constructed q woo u1cr penalty Of sib fSs p, saxh
s sGSeSy sy M s snn pI 0' TO
in ,lawa Of tho State Of Now York, relatlng to
Hcc. 2o,-wo and tho following,
No wooden or frnno hllAling whatever, whehor
.,a reI,nlis extended afesesal shs ea,eo
may ho hereafter oxoEactl& mall bu rataed enrGedt
within the llre-lm's ot ie said city, al tho a4,o
exondoa "a aforesaid, OF ay 10 horosflor o1sondcd
Tho laws eovernlng other cities doubtless
dtacoso tho same uBo Of tito wohds o,itntta"
mud show, beyond question, that thoir noannK
ia tho salno rs that attnohod to thcm by tito
Chartcr Of tho Oity Of Chicago, M nbovo quoted.
Tho word1 Of faw or ordinance aro to be con-
used: ia other statutes or ordlnnnccn
on. on tho r., naino nub]ocs or claea H.. q q
statca vs.. sanohat, a,lpin, p. 2ss (UnEod States
District Court, tho question aroso usrtlor What
class OF dutiea should como cestasn akort !olts
Of iron bent at ono end. Yoro they bolts Of iron,
manufauturol OF iron, Chain links. ota.7 Tho
evidence ofimportiug merchants. manufacturers,
anu mechanics wng tahon to drternlino 1t, hl
charging tho jury, Judge Hophnson said:
Yon have been truly told by tho counsel for dofaad
ant that t4s IL question Of construction at a Law
tou. It is certainly II would to follow frn,n
norier, Of Ito conntnx ouro. would be mast safoy
sAop.
itly dotlno tho moaning OF tho wosdB 's'iro-
ilmtH, +" as Wo hnvo aloWn 1t docs, md II thoso
worsis did not hRvo ftxud md fnvarinble stgn.a~
cation attaohod to them. as tnoy 'a'naonetotiy
tlat subject then wo ;nhould unAor tho wise,
common seMso rule laid down W Judge Hop
huapn, rcnort to tho vocabulary Il rnenlbors Of
Tiro Dopartlnonss, inBuranco men, etc.. 10 uo!vo
by tho words !. iiro-iinitB" III our city sorl.-
to tho " city llnits."
80 Would not tho inAtant and unl,csitatihg 'roply
IN substance: Ths tlre-limita Of city oniv,iaeo
all that portion OF Ito aroa within wA2oh no build
tngs Of wood, OF OF o:hcr than Gre-proof mate-
rials, car be erected."
uanco Of tie 10Th Of July, 1874, is: "1'ho Aea.
limits of the Glt7 OF Chicago aso hereby extended
! to tho corporate iinits Of aaid city,"
by forco OF thu words >. tiro- -limftB," this Bec
ton sufficiently prohibits tho erection Of build;
| nIgB OF wood or otIior oesnbustiblo, material
within tho corporate limits Of tho City OF Chicago
from tho date OF tho publication Of 'easd osai-
nanoe. '>
But 1t has been obJocsod. on tho authority Iof
lawyers, that the sections OF tho ordinance OF
Fobruary, 1879. subBequontto 500. /. au lefor to
tho dro-llmits aa doauad in said Soc, /, eud thu.
TINT section having, boon repoalcd by tho 1aat
ordinance -{1874), all tho othar sections Of tho
] former ordinance fnu With tho frat one 80 TO-
I pea!ed, since thoy all ycfer TO it,
l differ with uioHo whO have cIpro5Hod that
| opinion. No may at least with MI duo lnodeatY,
oay Tint tho opnion 60 confidently announced ID.
| ut Ill events, Ut questionable oorrectnoaa.
Certainly, I should not deem myHolf prudont
In advising olfont to proct 4 wooden building
] within tho corporate ilmits OF tho City OF Chi
cago aa long as tho ordinance Of tho 20th ol
July, 1874, continued in force. 1Ho nlny present
our vious this lattcr branch Of tho b1eok IN
! anOtlior article, 1t dcarod.
| Whatever rnav DO tho truth in respect to the
I questions which havo bceu raised conforming tlo
| into ordinance, it would undoubtedly bo Niaa
for tho Council to supplement- tia said ordinance
will another prescribing, with oil duo precHio,,
tho ponaltioa to bo incurred by an violators OF
Its provisions. For this will zomovo alt disputes
| % 10 tho operation Of the ordinance, whether
| they bo wou or i'll founded.
| CHag. II. MORSE,
| ., Lawyer, Room II, OTIS Block.
i CHICAGO, July Is, 1874,