The daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1873-1877, 1875-12-10
REPORT
OF
CITY ATTORNEY GEST,
ON THE
UNION SQUARE Cash!
Rock ISLAND, ILL.,. Dec. l 1875.

Rock ISLAND, ILL.,. Dec. / 1875.
To the Honorable City Council Of the City Of
Rock Island:
| herewith submit to you a report of the
proceedings in and result of the suit of
John Ruch VS.. The City of Rock Island:
The suit was in ejectment to recover the
undivided three-eighths Of the square of
ground in Spencer Il Cases addition to
the City of Rock Island, now commonly
known as Union Square" The Plain
tiff John Ruch, claimed the premises by
title in fee simply by conveyances from TIE
heirs of Jonah ii. Case, deceased. The
suit was originally commenced IN the year
1868 in the circuit court Of the United
States for the northern district of Illinois,
held at the city of Chicago, before Judge
Drummond, A trial was had in the year
1869, before Judge Drummond, and re-
Defendant. The Plaintiff took new trial.
as he was by law allowed to do, and the
case was continued for a new trial. Be
fore a new trial was reached the great
Chicago fire, of October 1871, took place,
and the entire record of the case was bura-
ed up.
The Plaintiff under the act of the legis-
lature Of this state, in such cases provided
had the pleadings IN the case supplied
and the suit redocketed, upon notice to
Judge Wilkinson, who had appeared for
the City in the former trial.
ln pursuance of a resolution pass
ed by your honorable body direct
ing me to push the case TO final
hearing with all possible despatch, i con-
ferred with Judge Wilkinson, and
we proceeded forthwith to get the case in
condition for trial, In the meanwhile two
Of the most important witnesses for the
city, Hibbard Moore and Henry Powars,
had died, and as their dispositions had been
burned up in the fire. | replaced them as
best | could, by proof of what their testi-
mOny had been on the former trial also
got the dispositions of all the other Wit
nesses who had testified upon the former
trial, and of several others by whom |
made proof Of important matters
The second trial came on at the last
October term Of the said circuit court, be-
fore Judge Blodgett, at Chicago, and re-
suited in verdict and judgement for the
City. At that term the case was the first
on the list for trial, Judge Wilkinson and
l appeared. for the City at the opening of
the term, ready for trial | took with me
Major Connolly and Mr. Elton G. Chopper as
witnesses in behalf of the City, in addition
to the dispositions | had taken. The pre-.
liminary business of the court was such
that it was several days before the case
could be got in for a hearing. The frs
trial, as am informed by Judge Wilkin
son, consumed but short time. At thi,
second trial the case was strongly anC
persistently contested by the plaintiff
counsel, Messrs. Bracket Il Waite, auC
four days time Of the court were consum
ed in the trial.
The Plaintiff, by his COUNSEL got leave t
file a bill OF exceptions in thirty days lrou
the day judgment was entered, which time
has not yet elapsed. No bill of exception
has as yet, been filed. If the bill of ex
ceptions is filed the Plaintiff can take
writ of error 70 the supreme court Of thu
United States at any time within FIVE year
FROM the day of judgment.
The Plaintiff did not, in the trial. den,
that the square had been dedicated t,
public use, but claimed that the use wa
limited to school and church purposes, an,
that it had been abandoned for such pur
poses, and that, consequently, the title re
yerted.
The jury found that it was a genera
dedication.
From what | had heard of the formc
trial was surprised at the holiness wit
which the case was contested By tn
plaintiffs counsel. They say they wi
take the case to the supreme court Of til
United States. My own impression is thG
they will not, that the matter is now {
an end.
1t may not be improper for me to sa
further: my Impression has been that tn
case was commenced and has been carrie
on with the expectation that the Cit
would pay something, as compromise,
order to get, as some suppose, fee Sit
pie title which would enable the City
sell the property. | have examined TIL
question with care and it is my opiniC
that no conveyance that the original or
prietors, or their heirs, could make wou
enable the City to sell the property or
vert it from the legitimate uses to whit
it was dedicated as public square -cl
cept by the universal consent Of the CT,
zens of the City.
l submit herewith Il copy OF Jud!
Blodgett's charge to the jury which tri,
the case
have preserved copy Of all the tes
mony that was taken in the trial, on o
part.
submit herewith Judge Wilkinson
bill for services, and my own bill for ST
wees and expenses rendered and incurr
in this case, Judge Wilkinson has h
the case in charge at Chicago, from t
time the new trial was taken, up to Il
time, think his bill is a reasonable OF
Respectfully submitted,
w. H. GEST, City Attorney.