The Lake County star. [volume] (Chase, Mich.) 1873-current, 1875-05-06
The Injunction.

less desirous OF knowing as to what
parties were directly enjoincd in
the matter ofremoving county prop
erty from Chase, and we can state
for we have seen copy of the doc
ument; that the persons named are
each member of the Board of SUI
pervisors, and Sheriff Grant, their
agents, "each and every one OF
them" Neither the County Clerk,
Treasurer or Judge of Probate are
mentioned.
We also have information in re-
gard to the alleged grounds for COM
plant. One complaint is, in sub
stance, that the Board of Supervis-
ors did not adopt any resolution
authorizing the County Clerk to
make necessary arrangements for
submitting the question of removal
to the vote of the people. The
Board designated Baldwin, Aug.
21st, 1874, but no resolution sub
hitting it to the people was adopt
ed then. At the annual session,
and on the 18th day of October,
1874, the following resolution was
offered by Geo. w. Townsend, Esq,
and adopted by the Board:
Resolved, BY the Board of Supcrvis-
ors of Lake county, that the County
Clerk be instructed to make the neccs-
sary arrangements for submitting to
the electors of Lake county, at the AM
nual Election, in April, 1875, the prop
OsitiOn to remove the County Seat to
Baldwin, as designated by the Board Of
Supervisors, Aug. 2lst, 1874.
Ofcourse, the presumption raised
in the mind of the Attorney Gen
eral and Judge Wheeler was that no
such resolution had ever been adopt
ed. At least, we can see no reason
for making such complaint, unless
that was the point intended to be
established.
Again, it was claimed that ille-
gal votes were polled in Pleasant
Plains and Glencoe townships, a
statement easily made, but in this
case hardly susceptible of proof.
Nelson II. Mckee, Esq, Supervisor
of Glencoe, testifies, we learn, that
the polls in that township were care
fully guarded, and that every vote
was challenged in cases where elect
ors were not well known.
Complaint was also, made that
some three or four votes against re-
moval were polled in Pleasant Plains
township, and not counted. The
opening of the ballot box will set
tie this sickly claim.
1t is claimed that certain par
ties came to Baldwin after the cleo
ton, asking to look at the registra-
ton books of Pleasant Plains town
ship, and were refused. This, we
are informed by several witnesses,
is untrue. The Town Clerk was
absent at Ludington, OH the day in
question.
So much for the claims of the
mischief makers; now, mark the
manner in which they go to work
to secure investigation of the grave
charges of fraud and corruption.
They induce the calling ola special
meeting of the Board lit only costs
the taxpayers s33 per day, besides
mileage and incidentally. When
the Supervisors came together, on
the 9Th, and resolution to defend
in the courts, the part of the peo-
pie, the Supervisors on the cast side
voted against it, and it was lost,
A motion was then made to adjourn
sine die. Afterwards the matter
was reconsidercd, and upon an ex-
PLANTATION being made by Judge
White, of the nature of the qucs-
ton, Supervisor Mckee changed
his vote, and it was resolved to de-
fend. An effort will now be made
to have the injunction dissolved
and the question will come up fol
argument before Judge Wheeler, al
Ludington, on Saturday, May 18th
On Thursday morning, the Boart
of Supervisors held "a brief session
and adopted two resolutions, one
virtually placing the county SAFE
and its contents in the care o
Treasurer Deurcss, and granting
permission to the Clerk and Judg'
of Probate to deposit valuable pa
pcrs therein, if they desire. Ate
the injunction has been dissolved
or, the trouble adjusted by law, thel
they are to have free access as here
tofore. The above was adopted cir
roce, only one nay being uttered
There was no outward opposition t
another resolution adopted, instruct
ing the County Clerk and Judge Q
| DuoLoto - co,tl, u;; a. .o,nnyo fbo,