The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1889-01-05
SATURDAY, Dec. 10Th, 1855.

morning, 49,.
SATURDAY, Dec. 10th, 1888.
Board met pursuant to adjournment.
Present same as Oh yesterday.
The record of yesterdays session was
read and approved.
Supervisor Fades presented the resigua'
ton OF John Doherty, ms justice OF the peace
in town of Bruce which had been fled III
tne county clerk Office, and the unexplred
term being less than one year, on motion OF
Supervisor Etdes the vacancy was filled by
the appointment of Ira D. Bullock
Supervisor Cullen offered the following
resolution:
WaEuEAs, at the September meeting of
this Board u resolution ~as adopted, reqlir'
ing that list of all poor people OF the
county. receiving outside aud from the coun'
" be published with the proceedings OF this
Board. aud
WHEREAS, we are of the opinion that a
compliance with said resolution in respect
10 the publishing Of he names and inhrma-
ties of the cDunly's poor would be giving
unne cessary publicity TO the mistortunes OF
life. the infrmiies of old age, the loss or
impairment of intellecIusl and bodily facul-
ties, OF sickness and of death, whct are
common to all humanity and the causes
which makeit necessary for so many wOathy
objects of public charity, and
WHEREAS. the law only requires that such
"A list be filed IN the office OF the county
clerk. and does not require the same to be
published that the publication thereof IL
contrary to public policy, against the COM
mon interests of humanity and without pre-
cedent either in the bes'0wing of public or
private charity therefore,
Resolved: That, that part OF The resolution
referred to in the preamble of this resolu'
tion, requiring the publication Of the names
and irfrmaties of those who are receiving
outside aid from the county be, and ls here
by recnded.
The Chairman decided said resolution out
of order.
Thereupon Supervisor Dunaway who voted
in the Aft rmative moved that the Board re-
consider the vote by which the resolution
was passed at the September meeting requlr
ing the publication of the names of persons
receiving county aid,
The motion wss lost by the following vote :
ayes -Burkhart, Burke, Crook, Cullen,
Dunauay, Duffy, Doyle, Donlevy, Gibbs,
Green, Hikok, Maierhofer, Mclaughlin
Rowe. Spencer, (Eiward), Westwood, White
IT
Noes. -Anderson, Armstrong, Bowen
Dinsmore, Dresser Fades, Ellsworth, FisCh-
er Grandson, Griffin, Quincy, Hitabrand,
Hoberg. jennings, Lukins McGinnls, Nc
rutyre, Norton, ShawbAck, Shafer, stanford
Spencer, (Chas, e. Thompson, Trumbo,
Werner, Wylie,-27.
MoInuop oppnarn1
before the Board and made report in wri
ing on the questions embraced in the reso'
luton adopted yesterday.
On motion of Supervisor Fischer, SAID re-
port was received placed on file and ordered
published with the proceedings of the Board
Said report is in the words and figures
following, TO wit:
To the Honorable Henry Gum, Chairman and
Gentlemen Of the Board q Supervisors Of LdSdih
COtnty:--In response u your resolution Of
Yesterday submit the following partial report
of my connection with the cases referred to IN
said resolution. owing to the limited time
piyen me TO make this report and owing to the
fact that | daily expected decision in the
Nilligan case, | postponed making report
to your honorable body until ! could make a
full. complete ard final one ans now in con-
sequence of those circumstances over which
have had no control ! am unable 10 give you
that satisfactory report which have SO much
desired and ardently hoped for.
| commenced suits in the name OF The Peo-
pie against Mr. Samuel W Raymond aud his
bondsmen, on eighteen different bonds given
by him while County Treasurer of this
county.
The cases were numbered on the docket in
the manner hereinafter stated, and after some
considerable delay, which was necessary both
from the crowded condition Of the courts
docket as well as from the time needed to a
proper presentation of each case, | obtained
Judgment in the different suits as follows:
No. $50, Judgment, S6S2.36; No. 35l, judg-
ment, 81 1862 SO; No. 352, judgment, 81 1858
No 1858, judgment, sl,27l "a; No 354, judg-
ment, 81 ,5S3 62; No. 355, judgment, Il, 593. IL;
No. $50, judgment, sl,4l306; No. 357, iudg-
ment, 81 ,S35 80; No 35S, judgment, 81 1924;
No. $50, dismissed; No. 800, dismissed; No.
1901 dismissed; No. 36l, judgment, IS JOB 30;
No. 362, judgment, 1887 %; No, 1853, judg-
ment, $500 IS; No. 1854, dismissed; No. S65
dismissed; No. 36S, dismissed.
Your honorable body will perceive that six
Of the suits commenced against Mr. Raymond
and his sureties were dismissed By me, and
the reason was that the statute of limitations
he'd run against them and prevented recov-