, 1874-12-05

Liz 4ilttu IsFhcllEGA tiJull lilo hh.Ft}cl5
Of Chicago by tho Iown-Board organizations
during tho Inst three years becomoa donbly
oppressive wlun 1t is Remembered that these
Town Boards nro ali imposition on Ccols
County III diroct violation Of tho Constitu-
ton OF 1U7D. Tho rec1s1essness aud inao-
cency Of thor grabs would soo1n to intlirato
that tho bonciciarics wore nwarc tint there
VIM no authority for thoir existence, md TINT
they oxpect to ba suddenly wiped out nj any
timo. The opinion given to tho Citizcns'
Association by Mr.. fumes r, Root about n
month ago Oh tlis subject WIZ tho correct
view Of tho case. There is no such thing MS
Town-Donrtl Government III Cook County;
and VIC believe that II will only be necessary to
tnlzo the proper logal steps tu secure judi
cial recognition Of this position.
Tho caso may bo sllccnctly stated ,w fol-
lowR: Tho Constitutional Convention Of 1870
provided two distinct syste1ns Of County
Government, leaving it Mt the discretion Of
the various counties of the Stute to organize
under either ono Or the other. Ono Of these
was the township organization, and the other
was the control Of county ntl'airs by Roard
of Commissioners. IN tho latter case it was
provided Tint there should bo three Commit
sionors III every county adopting the system,
except in Cook County. Iho exception in
Cook County WIS expressly made by the Coil
vention in order to tnke from Cook County
tho privilege given 10 all tho other counties Of
selecting their own system. In tho case Of
Cook County it was expressly provided (Sec.
7, Art x. J that "Tho county affairs Of Cook
County sllall be managed by q Board
Of Commissioners Of tifteon PERSONS ten
Of whom shall DO elected from tho City Of
Chicago, nud FIVE from towna outside of said
city, in such manner us may be provided by
law." In this why. tho Convention stipulated
TINT Cook County should bo governed by a
other counties in tho State tho option Of
either ono Of the two systems. About forty
counties organized under tho Commissioner
system, Tic remainder retaining tho Town.
Board system. The Legislature, however,
ignored the fact that the Constitution had
fixed tho character OF tile Cook County Gov
ernment, aud permitted it to retain the
Town-Board system along with tho Commits
sioner systom. It is manifestly absurd TINT
Cook County should have two systems
Of Government while every other county
in tho State has only one. In tho nb-
scnce Of my express prohibition Of this
dual system, it would DO held that this could
not be tho case. But tho Constitution also
provides, both generally and with specific
reference to township organization, that
there must bo uniform legislation for all
CFnfa lint {c n11 tsao
shall be organized either under the Town.
Board system or the Commissioner system !;
aud It would be n violation Of this principle
to permit any one county to hayc both sys-
toms.
Mr.. Tuley has more recently recommended
to the Citizens Committeo to avail themselves
! Of the constitutional privilege Of petition MS
means toward Kidding Cook County of this
incubus. 10 do this it will be necessary
to secure tho signature Of moro than 10000
legal voters in tile county, or ono-afta Of the
| entire number OF votes cast ut tho last o1ec-
ton. Tho question whether Cook County
| will continue or discontinue tho System Of
! Town Boards will then havo to be submitted
| to tho people Mt tho next general election,
] which would be next November, and SO be
determined by a majority Of tho voters. But
this plan manifostly includes waste of
time and money, if tho Constitution already
| provides tho Commissioner system for Cook
| County, as we bolieve to be the case. The
Citizeus Association hayo alreatly had
somo experience with the privilege Of
| petition in the matter Of incorporat-
ing the city under tho general law. It
is q tedious mud uncortnin manner
Of proceeding. II would require at least two
years, aud, meanwhile, We would hayo to
encounter serious ilnngers Of defeat through
tho opposition Of the professional politicians
before tho matter could be determined It is
u much simpler, spcedier, aud surer way OF
meeting tho difficulty to tal1o the question
| into the courts, and let tho Supreme Court
decide the meaning Of tho Constitution with
reference to Cook County. It will bo neces.
sary to havo this settled in any cnso. If il
stitution, can have no other than tho Colu
missioner system, that ends the matter. i
tic reverse, it will then DO in order to at
tempt ridlance Of tho Town Board b,
moans Of petition aud popular vote.
There are two points that need to be dis
tinctly recalled in connection with this sub
joct: ~ The intention Of tho trainers O
tue Constitution Must ba considered as affect
ing tho Interpretation to DO put upon IN,
part in controversy. Now, it wis the inten
tion of tho Convention to abolish the Tow1
DotrtlH in Cook County, being perfectly ia
miliar with their atrocous character and ut
ter usclessncss; m4d it was tho belief o
some eminent lawyers of tho Convention
among whom may be mentioned AIr. Hitch
cook, tho President, llessrs. Elliot Anthony
aud S. S. Hayes, that the nrticle providing 10
u Board Of Fifteen Commissioners in Cool
County did abolish 1t. (2) 1t isa well-ostal'
lisAed principle that u General Assembly ha
10 power to chango tue operation Of tho OF
gania law Of tho stAte, and our supreln
Court has frequently so decided. Therefore
| n4p,,.H Fc