USA > Illinois > Cook County > History of Cook County, Illinois : being a general survey of Cook County history, including a condensed history of Chicago and special account of districts outside the city limits : from the earliest settlement to the present time, volume I > Part 62
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83
In the Legislature of 1899-1900 the Civic Federation caused to be introduced a bill providing for the division of Chicago into dis- tricts having one or more judges with practically the same powers as justices of the peace. It was proposed that such judges, instead of being named by the Circuit and Superior court judges under ap- pointment by the governor and confirmed by the Senate, be elected by the people and be paid an annual salary of $4,000 each.
It was Judge Gary's opinion in 1898, while he admitted that many faults existed in the justice system of Chicago, that the imperfec- tions were not due to the fact that the justices were named by the judges, but because fees and not salaries were paid them. So long as they drew fees they would do nothing to curtail court cases and operations. If in any suit the odds were even, they would decide for the plaintiff, their customer. Every justice directly or indi- rectly solicited business in order to increase his compensation. One of the faults of the system in Chicago was that the judges who made the justice appointments could not know in all cases the qualifica-
638
639
HISTORY OF COOK COUNTY
tions and character of the men they appointed. It was thought that a salary to each justice instead of fees might in a large measure remove the objections.
The Legislature in 1899 passed a joint resolution creating the Practice commission. The design was to effect needed changes in the practice and procedure of the courts. During the year about 400 such changes were suggested, of which over 100 concerned the practice in justice courts. This seemed to indicate that there was something inherently wrong in the latter. There were at this time in the city twenty-four acting justices and in the county outside of the city 116 additional justices. In the North, South and West towns 57,979 cases were commenced in 1898. During the same period 18,697 cases were commenced in the Superior and Circuit courts. Thus, four times as many cases were commenced in the Justice courts as in the Superior and Circuit courts. The intention of previous Legislatures had undoubtedly been good. By enact- ment they had provided that all justices of the city of Chicago should be appointed by the governor, with the consent of the Sen- ate and upon recommendations only of the judges of the Circuit, Superior and County courts. This seemed to make ample provision for the best men possible, but such law had been passed about thirty years before. The city had outgrown such regulations, and a new order of procedure was needed. The fee system, it was asserted, should be substituted for the salary system. The degree to which the fee system had carried unjustifiable actions was pointed out as one of the consequences of the system. No justice, it was claimed, should be allowed to originate his own business. The fee system put a premium upon the number of actions commenced, and hence all justices sought vigorously to secure as many cases as possible. It was demanded that justices appointed as police magistrates should be required to devote their whole attention to criminal cases and that all persons except licensed attorneys should be prohibited from practicing in the courts. The abused right of an officer to arrest a violator of the law, it was claimed, made alteration and improve- ment of the system necessary. Under the existing practice a suitor who received an intimation of an adverse decision was in the habit of dismissing his case before trial. It was declared that the law should be so amended that he should not have a right to dismiss his case after a hearing had been commenced. Where a litigant thus received intimation of an adverse decision he dropped his case before that justice and commenced action before some other justice, and so continued until he received intimation that his case would be de- cided in his favor. Another serious objection to the practice was the right of a litigant to bring suit before any justice in the county. It meant great hardship upon men who were cited to appear through revengeful motives in distant parts of the county.
5
640
HISTORY OF COOK COUNTY
The extraordinary number of suits against the city for personal injuries declared to have been occasioned by defective wooden side- walks was cause for serious consideration during the summer and fall of 1900. By about the middle of September there were pend- ing against the city such suits to the amount of about $30,000,000. At the same time there were outstanding against the city judgments to the amount of about $2,000,000. During the previous year 400 of such cases were disposed of at a cost to the city of over $350,000. On January 1, 1900, about 1,400 of such cases were pending as against about 650 on January 1, 1897. About 85 per cent of the suits were of the personal injury class. Here then was a field for vast reform and improvement. It was an extraordinary state of affairs. It showed an utter lack of suitable precaution made sys- tematically and concertedly to protect the city's interest. The enor- mous expense of the legal machinery was largely thrown away. Upon investigation it appeared that during the past dozen years cases of this character by the hundreds had been commenced because shyster lawyers knew that judgments could be obtained owing to the weakness of the defense put up by the city. In numerous instances judgments by default had been taken against the city without a fight on legal and systematic grounds having been made. The pub- lic and the press demanded the establishment at once of an efficient city legal department that could meet and fight successfully all un- just claims of this character against the municipality.
In the fall of 1900 the extortion practiced by constables through- out Cook county was cause for urgent demand for reform. It was another fault of the justice courts. As much of the litigation in justice courts was begun solely for the purpose of securing fees, it followed as a natural consequence that constables themselves and other tipstaves would push their interests as far in the same direc- tion as possible. Accordingly there had grown up a shameful sys- tem of extortion and blackmail that was largely unknown to the masses of the people. The press at this date somewhat in detail called attention to these various abuses and argued that the system should either be corrected or abandoned. The best critics, among whom was Judge Carter, expressed the opinion that the proper remedy was the abolition of the fee system. As a matter of fact the justice courts had become the most objectionable and corrupt feature of the city government. Judge Carter himself called the whole justice court system a legalized band of hold-up men.
The looseness of judicial procedure in other courts of Chicago and Cook county was revealed in September, 1900, when Judge Hanecy released a convicted murderer upon habeas corpus because of the omission of certain words in the mittimus. It was shown at the same time that during the last preceding four years no less than thirty criminals had thus been released on similar technical grounds.
641
HISTORY OF COOK COUNTY
There was no doubt of the guilt of these men. The objections arose owing to their release upon some purely trifling matter. Reform in this particular was demanded by the public press.
Late in November, 1900, an important ordinance was passed by the City Council. It provided for a bill abolishing Justice courts and substituting District courts of record and for its reference to the appropriate State Legislative committee. This was the first definite action taken which culminated in the establishment of the present Municipal courts of Chicago. The bill was introduced in the City Council by F. K. Blake. It divided the city into districts wherein should be established Courts of Record to take the place of and supplant the Justice courts. But the Justice courts were not so eas- ily abandoned. Numerous methods to improve them or supplant them with something better were made previous to 1905.
In the meantime several important changes in the practice of the Circuit and Superior courts were suggested. However, all felt that contemplated changes in the Justice courts would work impor- tant improvements in all the other courts, and in the end they did. The introduction of the Juvenile courts to try offenders of tender years produced results so satisfactory that other improvements were demanded from time to time.
The first effective impulse given to the organization of the Munic- ipal court of Chicago was at a date just previous to the adoption by the people of the constitutional amendment of 1904 which now constitutes Section 34 of Article 6. The Chicago New Charter convention had considered many proposed amendments affecting the interests of Chicago and Cook county. Through its executive committee the convention determined to draft a bill to be introduced in the General Assembly for the creation of Municipal courts in this city. This executive committee consisted of John P. Wilson, John S. Miller, Murray F. Tuley, Carter H. Harrison, Bernard E. Sunny and Bernard A. Eckhart, with John P. Wilson as chairman. This committee employed Hiram T. Gilbert as an assistant and be- gan active work about December 10, 1904, all members of the com- mittee participating. On or about January 20, 1905, after many conferences and after mature deliberation, the committee agreed upon a bill to be entitled, "An Act in relation to Municipal courts in the city of Chicago."
This bill provided for one Municipal court designated the Com- mon Pleas court and five additional Municipal courts designated City courts. The former was given jurisdiction in all civil and criminal cases and proceedings except those generally in equity, but also of special equity cases, and the latter were given jurisdiction of cases over which justices of the peace had jurisdiction where the amounts did not exceed $500, and also of all other suits at law for the recovery of money only when the amount claimed did not
-
642
HISTORY OF COOK COUNTY
exceed $500. On January 24, 1905, this bill was introduced in the Senate and became known as Senate Bill No. 45 and was introduced in the House as House Bill No. 98. Immediately the character and purport of the bill evoked great interest among the members of the Legislature. Its provisions were studied and discussed in detail and there was developed strong opposition to its passage. This led · to the selection by the Chicago bar of sixty-eight members, together with four Cook county judges specially chosen, whose duty was to study, amend, elaborate, prepare and introduce a new bill that should meet all requirements thus far developed. The result was an amend- ed bill entitled, "A Bill for an Act in relation to a Municipal court in the city of Chicago." This was known as House Bill No. 27. It dropped from consideration the contemplated Common Pleas court and limited the jurisdiction of the Municipal court to all those suits and proceedings, whether civil or criminal, of which justices of the peace were given jurisdiction by law when the amount in- volved did not exceed $500, and of all criminal actions where the fine did not exceed $200 or where the imprisonment did not exceed one year, or both such fine and imprisonment. The courts under this bill were to be called City courts. Its provisions were radi- cally different from those of the original bill, as they prescribed that appeals should lie from its decisions to the Circuit, Superior, Criminal and County courts. The appeal cases were to be tried de novo as required under appeals from justices of the peace.
On February 21 there was introduced in the Senate what became known as Senate Bill No. 207, entitled "A Bill for an Act in relation to Municipal courts in the city of Chicago." This bill likewise omitted the Common Pleas court and provided only for Municipal courts with the same jurisdiction as was to be conferred upon the City courts as in Bills 45 and 98. At first the salary of the chief justice was fixed at $4,500 a year and of the associate judges at $4,000. The term of office was set at four years and the election of judges was fixed for the first Tuesday of April, 1904, and every four years thereafter. The bill also made the office of clerk and bailiff elective and named their salary $4,000 per annum. The House committee to whom was referred House Bill No. 98, after long deliberation, reported a committee bill entitled, "A Bill for an Act in relation to Municipal courts in the city of Chicago." This bill limited the original criminal jurisdiction of the Common Pleas court to misdemeanors. It omitted the article for a grand jury and made radical changes in the practice provisions. It provided that the judges should be elected on the first Tuesday of April, 1906, the chief justice for six years and the associate judges, one-third for two years, one-third for four years and one-third for six years, and further provided that an election for eight associate judges should be held every two years and for a chief justice every six
645
HISTORY OF COOK COUNTY
years. This bill was known as House Bill No. 422. In the Senate the provision for a Common Pleas court met with opposition and for a time progress was deadlocked. To reconcile the differences Hiram T. Gilbert was engaged to prepare the draft of a new bill that should do away wholly with the Common Pleas court. The draft thus prepared was in the main the bill finally adopted. The design of the Senate committee was to frame a bill that should pre- serve the practice provisions of House Bill No. 422, though dif- ferent in phraseology and form. To prevent overcrowding of the court, actions for ejectment, injuries to persons and qui tam pro- ceedings involving over $1,000 were omitted from the bill. The classes of cases which were to be tried without pleadings were en- larged so as to include all actions at law that did not exceed $1,000. House Bill No. 422 was amended in the Senate to correspond with the Gilbert bill. The House refused to concur in the Senate amend- ments, whereupon a joint conference committee, after making some changes in the Senate amendments, reported a bill that was adopted. During the entire period of these proceedings the members of the General Assembly gave protracted, intense and elaborate considera- tion of the new measure. It was supported in the House by Repre- sentatives Pendarvis, Church, Daugherty, Lindley, McGoorty, Mc- Kinley, McSurely, and Williams, and in the Senate by Senators Hass, Berry, Campbell, Galpin, Gardner, Humphrey and Maher. The final passage of the bill was credited to the energy, ability and determination of these gentlemen. . This law was approved May 18, 1905, and went into effect as soon as assented to by a majority of the legal voters of Chicago at an election held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday of November, 1905.
The amendment of the Constitution known as Section 34, Arti- cle 6, adopted in 1904, provided for the creation of Municipal courts to take the place of those held by justices of the peace and police magistrates, and empowered to perform other judicial work speci- fied and necessary. Instead of creating independent Municipal courts, the General Assembly, at its discretion, created branch Munic- ipal courts all under one head entitled, "The Municipal Court," just as each branch of the Circuit or Superior court is a distinct unit.
The jurisdiction of the Municipal court, briefly stated, was clas- sified under five varieties of action : First, when the amount claimed exceeded $1,000, and when actions for the recovery of personal property or for the recovery of certain damages exceeded $1,000; second, all suits, whether civil or criminal, at law or in equity, tried under change of venue from other courts of the county; third, all criminal cases in which the punishment is by fine, or by imprison- ment otherwise than in the penitentiary; fourth, all suits and pro- · ceedings of which justices of the peace had jurisdiction by law when the amount involved did not exceed $1,000, with some ex- Vol. I-37.
1
646
HISTORY OF COOK COUNTY
ceptions and limitations; fifth, all other suits at law and for the re- covery of money only when the amount claimed did not exceed $1,000.
At first the city was divided into five Municipal court districts, in each of which was located a civil and a criminal branch. This division proved unsatisfactory, and on June 10, 1907, under the Municipal court act, the judges entered an order abolishing the Third, Fourth and Fifth districts and rearranging the boundary lines of the First and Second districts so as to include the whole city. This order was approved by the council June 17, 1907, and became effective July 15, 1907. The First district comprised prac- tically all that part of the city north of Seventy-first street and west of. Lake Michigan and south of Seventy-first street and west of Cot- tage Grove avenue. The Second district comprised South Chicago. Thus the First district was made to embrace almost the whole of the present Chicago.
Full provisions for pleadings, for the dispatch of business and for the accommodation of poor suitors were made and were changed and improved from time to time as needed under the order of the court. The Municipal court was made to consist of twenty-eight judges, one of whom should be chief justice and the other twenty- seven associate judges. Each branch court was presided over by a single judge of the Municipal court. .
The duties of the chief justice were as follows: To provide for holding as many branch courts in each district as was necessary for the proper dispatch of business; to exercise general superintendence over the business of the court; to preside at the meetings of the judges ; to assign the associate judges to duties at branch courts ; to receive their monthly reports and to determine the times of their vacations ; to superintend the preparation of the calendars and deter- mine the order in which cases should be tried; to determine the number of petit jurors to be summoned and to cause them to be questioned as to their qualifications; to prescribe forms of praecipes, summonses, entries of appearances, affidavits, bonds, attachment writs, replevin writs, petitions for change of venue, bills of partic- ulars and all other papers necessary for the use of parties to suits.
The Municipal courts were required to be kept open for business every day of the year except Sundays and legal holidays; all suits were to be treated as emergency cases; vacations of judges were to be so arranged as not to interfere with the dispatch of business.
The associate judges possessed the following powers: To re- ceive and investigate all complaints concerning the court and the officers; to determine the number of deputy clerks and deputy bailiffs and to fix their salaries; to remove deputy clerks and deputy bailiffs; to institute such special rules and regulations as should seem expedient. These powers were more elaborate and extensive
647
HISTORY OF COOK COUNTY
than those possessed by judges of the Circuit and Superior courts. It was provided that no person should be eligible to the office of chief justice or associate judge unless he was thirty years of age, a citi- zen of the United States, and should have resided in Cook county in the practice of law for five years next preceding his election. Provision for an increase in the number of judges was made. The judges of the Municipal courts could interchange duties with judges of other city courts. The clerk of the Municipal court was made an important official personage. His duties were wide, important, and authoritative restrictions over him were made sufficient. Full pro- vision for all deputies, assistants, etc., was made. Aside from his salary no officer of the court was permitted to receive any compen- sation whatever.
The substitution of Municipal courts for Justice courts was such a radical change that the General Assembly and its advisers pre- pared a flexible code of practice so that faults which could not be foreseen could be corrected as fast as disclosed. To prevent serious blunder in the procedure, the rules generally prevailing in the Cir- cuit court were adopted, as it was believed dangerous to attempt at the outset to put in operation a new set. Ample power to make changes in the rules was given to the court officials. Full provision was made for every step necessary in the management of suits from the first paper until the settlement of the cases under judgment or otherwise. Scores of rules, regulations, practices, orders, etc., which need not be detailed here were adopted.
At the time the Municipal court act went into effect the Circuit court of Cook county consisted of fourteen judges and the Superior court of twelve judges. Each of these courts had a chief justice selected for one year by the judges themselves from their own num- ber. Each judge was entirely independent of every other judge and had power to adopt and enforce in the branch over which he presided such rules of practice not inconsistent with law as he might deem proper, regardless of the rules which might be adopted and enforced in other branches of the court. Though one judge might declare a statute or municipal ordinance constitutional or valid, an- other judge might declare it unconstitutional or invalid. One judge might pronounce a judgment of conviction in a criminal case, which another judge, upon application for a writ of habeas corpus, might declare invalid and might discharge the party convicted. Many other practices apparently inconsistent and cumbersome were carried out by the Circuit and Superior courts. As a whole the system was grievously unsatisfactory in its results. The cost to the taxpayer was out of proportion to the benefits. The Municipal court act sought to eliminate from the system such defects and in- congruities in the Circuit, Superior and Criminal court systems by providing a chief justice with extensive powers of superintendence
648
HISTORY OF COOK COUNTY
and by conferring upon the judges as a whole large discretionary authority.
Many changes have been made in the rules, management, pro- cedure and province of the court since it began operations. During its first year there were instituted in the First district seventeen branch civil courts located at 148 Michigan avenue. In these sev- enteen civil branches nine judges heard jury cases and eight judges heard cases without juries. There were thirteen criminal branches throughout the district. In the Second district there was one branch court located at 8855 Exchange avenue, South Chicago, for civil and criminal business. In the new city hall, quarters for the civil branches of the court were designed. It was planned to give the court twenty-four court rooms in this building, besides special offices for the chief justice, clerk, bailiff and jurors. Provision for addi- tional rooms for the Criminal courts was made. During the first year there was a noticeable decrease not only in the number of cases filed for suit, but in the commission of crime. The new court from the start established a reputation for efficiency and certainty of punishment which economized court expenses and deterred offend- ers from the commission of vice and crime. Not only was there an immense decrease in the number of arrests for felonies, misdemean- ors and violation of city ordinances, but there was a substantial in- crease in the number of persons sent to jail and to the House of Cor- rection. This improvement in court and criminal statistics during the year was attributed to the following accomplishments: Speedy trials; strict bail regulations; House of Correction rather than jail sentence; care not to interfere with the administration of justice in the courts and the consequent encouragement of the police officer to do his duty; imposing a heavy penalty for carrying concealed weapons.
The Municipal court was really a reform movement forced upon the people by the faults and imperfections of the Justice system and by the necessity for honest procedure and expedition. Great lati- tude to improve itself was given the court. Accordingly many amendments, changes, improvements and advances have been made as time has revealed their character, importance and necessity.
In 1907 the probation system was given special consideration. Prior to 1900 the practice of placing offenders against the criminal laws upon probation had received no recognition throughout the country except in one or two states. By October, 1907, the statutes of twenty-four states authorized probation for juvenile offenders, the statutes of nine states authorized probation for adult offenders, and the statutes of seven states authorized probation for adult delinquen- cy. About this time Judge Tuthill of the Juvenile court of Chicago said, "The probation officer is the keystone which supports the arch of the law." At first, probation was inaugurated in Chicago under
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.