, 1879-03-02

! ------
THE "LAKE-FRONT" LAWSUIT.
| "House Bill 420" represents measure
pending in the Illinois Legislature which
has either blackmail OF outright swindle
for its purpose. It is bill introduced in the
interest of the Canal Commissioners, and is
based upon recent legal opinion to the
effect that the title to the park strip Of
! land known as the stake Front" in this
city, is still vestedin said Canal Commission
ers. It authorizes and directs these Com
missioners to commence aud prosecute suits
! against every person, public and private
corporation, to secure 8 areconveyance to tha
State Of any land which the State has grant,
ed in alleged violation Of the trust upon
| which such land was originally ceded to the
State. The Lake Front is believed to be the
only piece Of property for the recovery Of
which suit would be instituted.
There ara two views to be taken about
this bill. One is based upon suggestion
which comes from Springfield to the effect
that the bill has been introduced ct the
instance Of the Canal Commissioners to hold
over the heads Of the Cook County members
tn ter7oren, as means for compelling them
to vote for the bill approp1iating 100000 to
the canal fund. IF that is the purpose of
he.biI, it is an unworthy and reprehensible
purpose, and the Cook County members
ought not to allow themselves to be in
fluenced by it. They should :vote for or
against the 100000 appropriation to the
cana! fund according to their own 1udg
ment as to the merits Of such an appropria-
ton, and without any reference whatever to
the fate of the bill directed against the City
of Chicago. #, On the other hand, it is the
intention of the Canal Commissioners and
their agents in the Legislature to con-
tond in earnest for the passage of
"House Bill 42O," then that bill should
be exposed md denounced as device for
promoting litigation and putting money into
the pockets Of certain clique Of lawyers,
without any expectation of public benefit
from the measure. If it shall ever become
law, then one set OF attorneys will be employed
by the Canal Commissioners (this set is al
ready engaged, we presume, and another
set By the City Of Chicago. Both sets will
be paid excessive fees during a long term Of
litigation, aud alt fees will come out of pub
lie funds, contributed in part by State taxa
ton aad in part By city taxation. Whatever
the result Of the proposed litigation might
be, the taxpayers would be the only suffer-
ers, and the lawyers the only benefciaries
There is no justice whatever in the pre-
,1nI o3nsp, AZ I'm h1-f In
sioners to repossession Of the Lake-Front
property. At the time when they were dis
posing of the property given to the State by
the United States for the benefit of the
canal, they sold all they could sell fronting
on the lake. They secured better prices for
this class Of lots by setting aside thin strip
to the east of Michigan avenue, to be forever
an open view to tho lake. Since that time
the strip las been widened by the protection |
afforded it by the city and the Illinois Gen. |
tral Railroad, and by the filing Of the ba- /
sin with dirt at the city's expense. The |
Lake-Front Park, as 1t is now, represents |
an accretion from the lake, and by e1pendi- |
lures made by the city, and the State has no
claim upon it in equity or in law. This
the clearer by the action taken
by the State Legislature in 1860, when it
formally released all claims that might still
exist by authorizing the city to dispose of that
After original and repeated acts
vesting the title Of this properly in the City
Of Chicago, and after acquiescing in the city's
possession thereof during long term Of
years, it is not likely that the Courts will
consent to dispossess the city, and deprive
it Of benefits secured by enormous city i'm
in one way and another. Il it can
DO imagined that the city can be dispossessed
By process of Inv, then tha Courts would Ger
tainly not rest the title in ths State on ao-
count Of violation Of trust, but in the
United States as the original owner, and the
United States Congress would quickly restore
he City Of Chicago to its lawful possession.
Tbs passage Of this bill, then, can have
10 other result than the expenditure Of large
;ums of money for The benefit Of the t trades
luion" of lawyers. Indeed. the very bill
tself is based upon the paid opinion of one
aw-firm. Taking this practical view of the
natter, We cannot believe That majority Of
he Illinois Legislature will consent to its
passage, no matter what influences Or threats
my be brought to bear in its fayor.
|
The Cincinnati newspapers ard distil1ers
re mad at The TE1BusE's recent expose of
he frauds perpetrated in the Paris Of Amer