, 1881-03-06

|
1t cedes absolutely to the city all of the Lake
Park south OF Monroe street to Park row
It ccdes the three blocks north of Monroe
street to the Railway Companies, thus cover
] ing two blocks the fee Of which was in the
United States.
The owners of property fronting on the
two northern blocks, or parts Of Sec. 10, OBJ
| tanned leave to file a bill in the name Of the
United States to enjoin the execution Of this
| act, so far as it authorized the closing of the
! open view Of these two blocks OF United
States ground which extended from Ran
| dolplsto Madison street. The Court, holding
that the owners of this property could not be
deprived without their consent Of this right,
Which they had obtained from the United
States, granted the injunction.
| In the meantime tho Railway Companies
rendered the first payment Of ou,ooo, which
the city refused to accept, as it refused to
execute the deed, md it has never made d
Quitclalm deed. as the act required.
Thus the matter stood until the Leg1sla-
ture. by the act in force July l. 1873 uncon-
ditiOnaly repealed the act OF 1869.
In 1881 all the property y-oWners III whose
behalf the injunction was granted. by an
instrument properly executed. gave their
consent to the proposed cession by the city
of the Blocks and to the Railway Compa-
MES, and the City Of Chicago, by the. bill
which has been pending III Congress, asked
the United States to code to the City of Chi
cago whatever reversionuy claim the Gov
eminent might hnyc in those. two blocks, so
that the city might dispose of them, with one
other block, to the Railway Company for 4
great passenger depot. In that act Congress
was asked to cede the land from Michigan
avenue to the railroad tracks, and nothing
more.
Such are the facts Of the case, and 1t is q
question for those who opposed this bill to
answer how fur the defeat or passage Of that
bill could have changed the legal aspects of
the case, except to delay the improvement of
the property and Of all the property on Mich
isnn avenue, to delay the expenditure Of
million Of dollars for labor and materials,
and to delay the receipt by the city Of three
fourths OF million Of dollars net and by
the State of largely increased revenue.
Tho question Of the right Of the Illinois
Central Company to the submerged land east
OF its track along the Lake-Fr0nt, under the
legislative act of 1869, is one that must be
eventually determined BY the Supreme
Court of the State. The bill pending before
Congress conferred no titls Or privilege on
the Railroad Company east Of its railroad
tracks or south Of Madison street which it
does not possess HOW. The bill simply re-
moved technical restriction upon the city
from receiving for three blocks Of useless
land S750, 600 which it could not receive other
wise. The whole claim to riparian rights
on the Lake-Front' was left precisely Us it
stands now. The city was expected to ex-
ecute a quitclaim deed to tile three blocks
only, leaving all the legal questions to tho
Lake-Front east of the railway tracks to be
determined by the Courts hereafter. The
bill before Congress neither improved nor
Injured the Illinois Central claim thereto;
nor did it weaken any defense or objection
this city may set up against that claim.
The Illinois Railroad Company claims all
rights east Of its tracks under its charter, its
original grant OF land, and especially the act
of the Legislature OF 1860. The only claim
of the city to the fee OF any part OF the Lake
Iark is under the same act of 1869. II the
repeating act OF 1915 abolished any rights of
prope: 81, then it deprived the city Of its fee
in the Lake-Front between Monroe street |
and Park avenue. and wipes out all claim east |
Of the tracks, II the repeating act Of 1878 is |
valid, the city's right In Lake-Front Park is
merely what it was before 1850, which at |
most was that Of public common or park, and
how TAR subject to the control Of the State
we will not now stop to inquire.
The Railroad Companies by their tender |
under tho act of 1869 matured their title to
the three blocks. 50 far as that act could give
little. The authority Of the State, as owner |
Of the fee, to sell the south one Of the three
blocks will not be questioned. How far the
repeal in 1875 Of That act Of 1863 affected
rights completed during the Intervening four
years is purely 4 legal question, which In no
wise was affected one way or the other by
the bill before Congress. Whatever rights
he parties have now would not have been
n the least affected or changed had the bill
passed Congress. The only loser is the City
If Chicago, Which loses $780, 900 cash for Il
lutclaim deed to three blocks Of ground to
which it has but sort Of park or open-yiew
tile.
Whether the Railroad Company has or has
1ot any title east Of its railway tracks can
lave no direct or property interestto the City
1t the grants made by the act Of
sC9 for consideration were final and ire
,ealable, that is nm end Of the matter as to
Ill property east OF the railway tracks. II
hose grants be declared void by the Courts,
hen all that properly under water reverts to
he State, and not to the city, and If sold
will be sold for the benefit Of the State, and
Iot Of the city.
We think that, In the light OF all these in
isputable facts in the case. there will be an
greement Of opinion that those who OBJ
ected to the bill in Congress ceding to the
'ity Of Chicago the color of title Of the
United States to the two blocks have bluil-
ered,-haye stood in the way Of the inter-
sts of the city, whlchis the sole victim. They
elayed or defeated great public improve
lcnt, under pretext Of defeating lcgisla-
On which was not Intended, nor asked, nor
esircd by anybody.
.[=-zz.@-==
OPTIMISM IN POLITICS.
Optimism is, and always has been, the vice
American politics. Webster, and Clay
nj nour1aa npd their necnc3ofoe ,vnra co