The Cairo bulletin., 1911-04-20
SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS
u7HoLDs CIRCUIT COURT
IN UNION COUNTY.
PETITION NOT IN TINE
Fur Years Elapsed and Much Work
Ccne on District Before Pro-
test Was Made--Psti-
tion Denied.
to The Eulletin.

Special to The Bulletin.
| Springfield Hi, april 19.-The su
/ premc court today affirmed the iuig
mcnt Of tie circuit court Of Union
county in the case OF the people oI
| the state of Illinois, Ex-Rela lone
| Thomas S Aldrilge and others, plaiA
| itjffs in error agains, Robert VI. Ren
| dleman, Samuel r. Dayie and Thomas
j. Mcclure William il, Lyerle, states
attorney OF Union county, had prs
Sentcd to the circuit court or Nat
| county a petition for lcaye TO file d
| lquo warranto against Robert +. Ren
| dlcman and Samuel II. Davie OF 1fnlor
county, and Thomas j Mcclure oi
Alexander county, to require them u
show Ny whl authority they claimed
TO hold and execute the office of cora
rissionels or Clear Creek Drainage
District Of the counties named, and
by what right they claimed that sail
district Lad q legal existence and q
right to hold and execute the fran
chlse CT a corporation ard to exercise
The rights and privileges of drain
age district. The circuit court OF
IlnIon county entered an order re
Gusing leave to file the the informa
don and dismissed the petition aud
adjudged the ecsts against the re
lators, aud the petitioners sued out a
writ of error to the supreme court.
Claims Technical Error.
1'he rer4g6ncFs rrsger- ma t;f'
petition to organize the drainage and
leyce district did not contain de.
'cription Of the proposed starting
points, route and terminus of iht
work thereby proposed and that the
petitioner did not contain a sufficient
description of the lands affected by
he proposed district; did not give
he names Of TIE owners thereof;
nat a majority of the land owners
n numbers, did not sign the petition
md tAat tie county cour acted With
out sufficient notice being publishes
and Given as required by the statute.
hat Ezekiel Moore was an owner oI
land located within the boundaries
Of the dis rct and was resident Of
JACKSON county and that he never
al any notice and had not entered
MS appearance to the petition CIR the
proceedings thereca 1t is also 81
eyed that tie commissioners with
rcw he assessment roll and pro
urd the discharge Of the jury anc
hal material alterations made WITH
at having another petition signed by
he land owners, or majority o
hem, and Chat the aggregate cstima
d cost of the work as shown by t1c
last report was $4,000, whereas tht
1rst cost was given as $225,OoO.
The Courts Decision.
The supreme court, in passing OF
he case says
"l'he irregularities in The organiza
ion Of this drainage district that NJ
set up in the petition relate to mat
.ers that existed a the time that IT,
court entered the order conflrmip
tho organization of the districl
| knowledge of these supposed defe i
must have been acquired by the rC
lators in the early ages Of the ol
| ganization OF the district At Al
| events they were notified in the MAJ
ner required BY the statute and the
must be presumed 10 have had know
edge of the irregularities upon whlc
they relied, Nearly four yea
ELAPSED after this district was orgeI
ized before tic realtors applied %
'cave to file this information. Durin,
that time the airidavits filed in oppc
| siiion 10 the mo ion show that al
| expense Of about $4,000 has been u
Cured in connection with the organ;
zation Of the district. there has bevl
much labor expended, and In addit,u
to the money, there has ben a vas
amount of work done which is no
represented by the money eXpendei
This circumstance was entitled Z
great weight in determining whet.N,
the court. in the exercise Of It's dii
erection, would allow the inlormatiol
o be fled
without reference to the otoe'
questions, We are OF the opinion tha
the decision of the court below ma,
| -----~------------.-----