The Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1877-1885, 1884-06-05
TROUBLED COUNCILMEN.
An Alderman of Freep0rt Fined S25
and Costs.

A rather interesting case has just been
concluded at Freeport, in which an alder
man was fined $25 for violating an ordi
nance, which he himself helped pass. The
circumstance is related by the Daily
Bulletin, as follows;
Tie celebrated case of the city of
Frceport against Aldermen Daniel Adam
son and r. NJ Race, for violating the
ordinance regulating the construction of
buildings within the fire limits, was tried
before Justice George Oyler and jury on
Monday. The jury consisted of l. F.
Kleckner, J. H. Staver D. D. Wareham,
Orrin Crocker and VIM. Snyder, only FIVE
The sixth man. James Bowers, was drawn
on the jury before dinner, but he failed to
appear iu time after the MONDAY meal,
and so the trial went on by consent of the
interested parties. The witnesses who
testified for the prosecution In the case
were Luther Lighthart, ]. B. Delhauer,
S. F. Taylor. Jacob Hartman. J. W.
Sanderson, Josh Kenegy, and A. D.
Boyington. The witnesses for the defense
were Alderman Adamson, Alderman Race,
T. L. Waddell, II. IL. Upp, and Ed Race
As before stated the counsel for the pI os
ecution were City Attorney Geib and
Charles Green. Hon. John c. Kean
conducted the defense The trial was
quite spirited and no little sport was made
for the lockers on, of whom there were
many. The testimony was finished and the
speeches over late in the afternoon, when
the case was given to the jury, which was
not out long when verdict was agreed
on 1t was. in substance, to fine Alder
man Adamson $25 and costs and dis
charge the case against Alderman Race
Alderman Adamson may appeal the case.
but it is not likely that he will.
The case was brought against the Al
derman because of frame addition built
on to barn, the property OF Alderman
Adamson at the rear of the latters resi-
dence on Clark avenue and within the fire
limits The work on the building was
done by Alderman Race, and for that
reason he was included in the case as a
violator of the ordinance. The work on
the building was begun, according to the
testimony, April 22nd last, and on the
gath of April further proceedings in that
direction were stopped by the mayors
order, which was delivered by Chief OF
Police Sanderson. This was done because
there had been no legal building permit
issued and because it was in reality
a violation of the requirements of city
ordinance passed, Dec. 3rd, 1888. Nc
legal permit was ever issued, but one
which was of no effect, signed by the fire
committee. After time the addition
was proceeded with and completed. The
counsel for the prosecution claimed thai
it was in direct violation of the ordinance
which prohibits and enlargement of {
wooden building within the fire limits.
| Counsel for the defense claimed that thu
work done was only repairs, and that such
| repairs had right to be made as the cost
of the same was not in excess of fifty pei
cent of the value Of the whole building
before being repaired, which another sec
| ton of the ordinance allows, under certain
conditions.
According to the ordinance, unless Mr.
Adamson has the addition in question
removed. he is liable to fine of from So
to 800 for every forty-eight hours it i
allowed to remain as it now is.