The Cyclopædia of American biography.

LOESCH

LOESCH

of the Postal Telegraph Cable Company, from n
1894 to 1906, and from its organization in July, f
1913, to the present date (1923) has been gen- s
eral counsel for the Chicago Union Station I
Company, in the construction of the new a
Union Station at Chicago. Mr. Loesch ori- 2
ginated and argued the cases in the State and e
Federal Courts, which secured to the Postal t
Telegraph Cabl'e Company telegraph line ease- (
ments upon railroad rights of way throughout 1
the West. Another case in which he attained a
great success was that of Donovan vs. the 1
Pennsylvania Railroad Company (199 U. S. (
Supreme Court 279), which settled the law
as to hackmen's rights in railroad stations, reversing the trend of state decisions which were
giving unrestricted rights to hackmen in such
stations. He was also responsible for the success of the litigation brought by the Sanitary
District of Chicago against the Pennsylvania
and other railroads, the claim being that the
latter had encroached upon public rights on
river fronts. These claims were defeated and
an award secured of $1,400,000 for land taken
for widening the river. Although in these suits
Mr. Loesch had the assistance of associates
who were leading lawyers, his knowledge of
the facts, his skill in the preparation of details
and in securing expert witnesses on disputed
questions of fact, were undoubtedly the decisive factors in securing the favorable decisions of the Supreme Court. He has appeared
also, in a number of important cases in general
practice of the law, notably in the famous
Leslie Carter divorce suit. As junior counsel
for Mr. Carter, the preparation of the case
for trial devolved almost wholly upon Mr.
Loesch, and the result was a complete victory
for his client in all the courts. Mr. Loesch
also prepared the briefs and arguments in the
Appellate and Supreme Courts and then argued the case orally with his senior, Edwin
Walker, Esq. This decision has become a
leading case in many features of divorce law
and evidence. Although in no sense a politician, Mr. Loesch has been very active in civic
organization, and has rendered valuable public
service in various capacities. In September,
1908, he was appointed by the Criminal Court
of Cook County special State's Attorney in
and for the county. He had a special grand
jury impaneled and over one hundred and fifty
indictments were returned. The grand jury
filed a written report going over the frauds
committed, which was a record document. All
prosecutions failed, however, because the Supreme Court declared that the law under which
the direct primary election was held was unconstitutional. The case is reported as People
vs. Christopher Strassheim, Sheriff (240 Illinois Reports, Page 279). Another conspicuous
public service for which Mr. Loesch was responsible was that in connection with the attempt to force the use of voting machines at
the Presidential election in November, 1912.
Voting machines had been purchased at an
expense of something like a million dollars of
which a quarter of a million had been paid
by the City. The voting machines were authorized by the Legislature. It appeared certain that if only voting machines were used,
not less than fifty thousand and probably a

nuch larger number of voters would be disranchised, with the result of making a clean
weep for the Democratic party in the City.
Lawyers were not willing to attack the law,
nd held, at any rate, that it was too late.
After a critical
examination of
the voting machine and the
law, he gave it '
as his opinion
to the Citizens
Committee then
acting, that the
voting machine
law was inrequest h e
brought mandamus proceedings in the Supreme Court of
the State of Il- T
linois against
the Election
Commissioners, within five weeks before
election, and obtained an order of the
court to produce an election machine before
the full Supreme Court at the hearing of the
case which was summarily set for a short day.
The court ordered practical tests made of the
machine in its presence, an unprecedented
thing, and rendered an opinion that the machines could not comply with the law. They,
therefore, granted the prayer of the petitioners
that the voting booths should be restored but
permitted the machine to be voluntarily used
by such voters as chose to use them. The result at the election indicated that the machines
were worthless in this state by reason of the
long ballot and the complicated voting. They
were discarded and the public was saved on
the first purchase of the machines three-quarters of a million dollars. In subsequent litilgation brought by the voting machine manufacturers, the court held the contract to purchase the machines invalid, and released the
city from all liability thereunder. He also
tried before the Election Commissioners and
in the lower court, the case of the People vs.
Lueders, a suit of great public importance,
involving the right claimed by the election
commissioners to deny petitions to submit propositions relating to local option and other
public questions at elections. They defeated
the will of petitioners by delaying action or
denying the petition, with the result that the
elections at which questions were to be submitted always passed before an appeal from
the action of the Commissioners could be
heard. In this case a petition with the required number of signatures had been submitted to refer the local option question to the
people. It was denied on the usual subterfuge
that there were an insufficient number of lawful signatures. The Supreme Court was besought to intervene by mandamus but declined
to do so because tickets could not be printed
in time for use at the ensuing election. Petition for mandamus was thereupon prepared
and by Associate Counsel filed in the Supreme
Court on the ground that the election com

193