Chicago eagle. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1889-19??, 1903-04-04
JOHN E. OWENS.


notice of any one interested in the
municipal affairs of the city of Chi
cagO. II shows In Il nutshell two
things: First. that the City of CHI
cago should repair the streets and side
walks without any further tritling:
and. second. that the city Attorney
has shown eminent ability In the dis
charge of his duties. Two classes of
citizens are Interested In this report
the party injured and the citizens who
pay the taxes. Both of them suffer
ana between them stands the city At
torncy who represents the city. When
the average taxpayer reads that suits
have been brought against the city I'm
1902. aggrcgating Slj.On0.OuO. he Is
nstoundcd. He knows that the num-
her of suits will multiply unless some
radical action is taken 10y the city at
once 10 remedy the present deplorablc
condition of the streets ana sidewalks.
The City Attorney must defend nc-
iions resulting from the neglect of the
street department. the head of which
declares he is powcrlcss to remedy
| INV 'Ni~ll1e 'NI I'l f''N w
While do not agree with Mr.. owens
in his political views. must frankly
admit that as city Attorney he has
treated the bar with courtesy. has
shown great ability ana decision of
character. tried most of his own eases
aud has saved the city from large
judgments in personal injury cases by
| ,.I,
city calendars. From his standpoint
this Is Il good stroke and has put II
uuietus ON the bringing of many suits
AMI has made II possible to reduce the
average size of judgments against the
city to less than Onchalf what they
formerly were.
} The average Judgment against the
city In 1880 was Sl.5II.4'i: In 1901.
Sl.6l9.j,i: In 1872. Sl,'iji.,1i %; In
lS!l3. S1iII.3l: In 1874. Sl.I5SII: In
1880. Sl.222.0O: In 1SH; SI.041 90; In
1897. Sl.12lO0: in 1S9S. Sl2S.OO: in
$500. Sl.132OO: in 1900. SoI1.OO: in
1871. SSiO.W: In 1902 owens admin.
istrntionD, SGiS.O0.
1T must he admitted that the judges
/, stretched point by allowing the max
ing of special city calendars: hut the
situation was u serious one and called
for I'm extreme remedy. If the 81
suits tried by Owens In 1907 had been
u tried ms suits were tried In IS9l where
III" average Judgment was Sl.I5S.T7
the total amount of the judgments foi
lyo2 would have been 81 .i0S. lO5.GS in
i stead of SjloojOOO. This separate
/ calcndarmovc was II saving In itself {,
:. the city of S9IS. l:5.jS-nlmost on,
million dollars. This was u great
stroke for the city Attorney and II
, blow to the business of many personal
!. injury lawyers. In law the separate
calcndar.syStcm cannot be defended
and II adopted rs to other corpora
tions would he u menace 10 the rights
|. Of litigants In Chicago. When upwards
u of one hundred eases are placed on |;
y city trial calendar and called consccu
lively, the litigant whose ease H. no
NJ the top of the calendar cannot tx
/ poet even fair Judgment because Tho
- iurlcs who sit alternately soon bcgii
T. to think that If they render or,llnnr,
# sized vcrdicts the city will soon b.
come bankrupt II the same results
would follow In ease the traction com
=. panies succeeded in having spcria
:. trial calls made there would he u gen
i. oral uprising of the Chicago bar. |,
-. * possible that IT special calendar,
- were made IN traction eases the pre-
=, Scntatlon of the evidence as To tn,
- neglect of the companies might cnlTg,
the iuri"s and hence the attorneys FOL
traction companies have not yet dare,
10 suggest this cause.
y lis II not time that some action wa,
taken by the street Department OF
the City of Chicago to render tn,
- streets ana sidewalks safe when II
appears that there are now more per,
sonal injury eases pending against til,
city of Chicago than agains, the cities
Il of New York. 81. Louis. Minneapolis
Boston. Philadelphia. Cincinnati. ben,
YER AMI Omaha! In fact, New Yor!;
It has less than loo personal injury
: cases pending against II. and all tho
other cities mentioned T39. making IN
al about l,DuO eases, while Chicago
-, had pending against II ON Jan. I. 1909
:, 2,32i eases. II judgments IN these
|, .,3oi eases were entered for Sl.TJS.WI
-. III" average Judgment for 1894. thcs,
judgments would aggregate Si.OS5,,
hG.OO, ana II judgments were entered
In lhrS" cases for the lowest average
~ To wit, SiiSun, still the judgments
would amount Ia ~ 500 9JouO
a." since 1873 the number of personal
- Injury eases have been RAPIDLY multi
plying against the City of Chicago
Tie number uf such suits pending
against I'll" city Jan. l. lSg3. were 40;
It on Jan. !, 1854, lo5; ON Jan. |, lSo5
: 3-n: On Jan !, 1895. 1875: on Jan. l.
!. 1897. Il'i: on Jam, |, lS!,S, 99l: on jan
!, 1889, LIE; ou Jan. |. 1900, l,55i;
on Jan. !, 1901, l,HiU: on Jan. |. 1907
l. 100: on Jan. I, l1O, 2,32i. As the
+. street ana Sidewalk Department neg,
e lr"t"d lis duty the city was made IA
4 pay NOR" In judgments than would
hay" laid the best cement sidewalks
IN I'll" greater part of the city.
'Nh"n il De- considered that the
city Attorney is only Il young man
llttl" over ON" year in office ana still
under ~ years Of age, and disposed
u of ~ suits. where the total dam