Chicago eagle. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1889-19??, 1903-04-04
JONI E. OWENS.
From the Chicago Law Journal:

notice or any one Interested i'll the
municipal affairs Of the City of Chi
cago. 1t shows IN nutshell two
things: First. that the City of Chi
cago should repair the streets and side
walks without any further trifiing;
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
and between them stands the City At
torncy who represents the city. When
the average taxpayer reads that suits
have been brought against the city In
1902. aggregating S15.OOOO0O. he IL
ustounded. He knows that the num-
her of suits will multiply unless some
radical action IL taken by the city at
once to remedy the present deplorable
condition of the streets and sidewalks.
The City Attorney must defend nc.
tions resulting from the neglect Of the
Street Department. the head Of which
declares he Is powerless to remedy
the existing evil for lnck of funds.
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 and decision of
character. tried most of his own eases
and has saved the city from large
Judgments In personal injury cnses by
pNss
city calendars. From his standpoint
this IL n good stroke and Inns put u
quietus OH the bringing of many suits
and has made It possible to reduce the
average size Of judgments against the
city to less than One-half what they
formerly were.
The average Judgment against the
city I'm 1890 was $l.5I1.46: I'm 1901.
x1.610.56: In 1892, S1.b56.D6 30; In
1888. $1.617.34; In 1894, S1.15S.I7: In
1895. S1,222.OO; In 1896. $1.O41.OO; in
1897, $1,124.OO; In 1898. x!'2S.OO; In
1900. $1,132.OO: In 1900. x011.OO; In
1901. $4,000: In 1902 owens admin.
istmtion). $64S.OO.
1T must he admitted that the judges
stretched n point by allowing the max.
ing of special city calendars; but the
situation was serious one and called
for IN extreme remedy. II the 49,
suits tried by Overs In 1902 had been
tried as suits were tried In 1894 where
the average Judgment was $1.15S.77
the total amount of the judgments fol
1902 would have been SLABS. 1O5.GS in
stead of $j10.050.00. This separate
calendnrmove was II saving In itself t.
the city of $07S. 1a5.GS-nlmOst one
million dollars. This was great
stroke for the City Attorney and Il
blow to the business Of many personal
injury lawyers. In law the separate
calcn,lar-system cannot be defended
and II adopted as to other corpora
lions would be a menace to the rights
of lItlgants In Chicago. When upwards
of one hundred cases are placed on Il
city trial calendar ana called cOnsecu
lively. the lltigant whose case IL moi
mt the top Of the calendar cannot OK
pect even II fair judgment because TIN
} juries who sit alternately soon bcgiI
, to think that II they render OrlInar,
sized verdicts the city Will soon be
come bankrupt. II the same results
would follow In case the traction com
panies succeeded in having specln
trial calls made there would he gen
eral uprising of the Chicago bar. II
is possible that II special calendar,
were made In traction eases the pre-
sentatlOn Of the evidence as to tn,
neglect of the companies might enrags
the juries and hence the attorneys fol
traction companies have not yet dared
to suggest this cause.
rs 1t not time that some action was
taken by the Street Department OF
the City of Chicago to render til,
streets and sidewalks safe when II
appears that there are now more per,
sOnal injury cnses pending against the
City of Chicago than against the cities
of New York. st. Louis. Minneapolis
Boston. Philadelphia, Cincinnati. Den.
yer and Omaha? In fact. New Yorl,
has less than LOO personal injury
, cases pending against 1t. and all the
other cities mentioned $50. making IN
all about 1900 cases, while Chicago
had pending against II on Jan. l. 1908
2324 cases. Ii judgments In these
2.3?4 cases were entered for $1,75S.OO
|. the average Judgment for 1894. these
judgments would aggregate $4,OS5,
5000. and II Judgments We're entered
In these cases for the lowest average
to wit, SC4SOO, still the judgments