USA > Iowa > Webster County > Fort Dodge > History of Fort Dodge and Webster County, Iowa, Volume I > Part 10
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
74
HISTORY OF WEBSTER COUNTY
January 22, 1853, the same assembly passed an act entitled "An act to create the county of Webster." The act of January 12, 1853, which changed the name from Risley to Webster was to go into effect upon publication in certain papers. A certification signed by the secretary of state accompanies the law to the effect that the act was published in the required newspapers on January 22, 1853. This date is the same as that of the approval of the new law to "create Webster county by uniting Risley and Yell into one new county to be called Webster." The latter act was "to take effect from and after its publication in the Iowa Star; Provided the state shall incur no expense for such publications." No ac- companying note tells when the act was so published. It was usual in such cases for a few days to elapse between the approval of an act and its publication.
The fifth general assembly passed two laws affecting county boundaries. One of these laws was passed by the legislature January 21, 1855 and was approved on the same day. It bore the title of "An act to extend the boundaries of Kossuth county, and to locate the seat of justice thereof ;" but this title was not adequate to the contents of the measure. By the terms of this act the counties of Bancroft and Humboldt were blotted out. Bancroft and the northern half of Humboldt were added to Kossuth; while the southern half of Humboldt was added to the already overlarge county of Webster, making it the largest county in the state, having an area of forty townships or 921,600 acres. Thus the boundaries of Kossuth and Webster were enlarged. But these boundaries were not to be permanent as will be seen later.
The sixth general assembly, like the fifth, passed two laws, bearing upon the subject of this chapter. The first of these was approved on December 22, 1856, and went into force on January 8, 1857. This act created a new county, to be called Hamilton, out of that part of Webster county which lay east of range 27 west. In size it was four townships square, having exactly the same bound- aries as the former county of Risley. Its boundaries, as thus established, have remained permanent.
The other act passed at this session was approved on January 28, 1857, and went into force on February 26. It created the county of Humboldt between Wright and Pocahontas. To do this eight townships were taken from Kossuth and four from Webster county. The new Humboldt, as its boundaries were defined in the law, was four townships smaller than its predecessor of the same name. It was also smaller than Wright and Pocahontas counties, its neighbors on the east and west.
During the next session of the legislature an act explanatory of the one under discussion was passed. In a preamble of two paragraphs it was claimed that the act of January 28, 1857, had originally created Humboldt county of a larger size, that is, four townships square. The preamble claimed. further, that a mistake had been made when the act was printed in the public laws, whereby township 90 had been omitted, and also that the original of the bill had been lost. This being the situation the legislature passed a new act construing that of January 28, 1857, in such a way as to include township 90, ranges 27. 28, 29, and 30 in Humboldt county. The act even went further and defined the boundaries of the county anew in such a way as clearly to include the territory in dispute.
75
HISTORY OF WEBSTER COUNTY
Between the passage of the two laws just discussed the present constitution of Iowa was declared in force. It contained a provision to the effect that future laws altering county boundaries should be submitted to a vote of the people of the counties concerned and must be approved by them before going into effect. The amendatory law of March 11, 1858, had not been submitted to the people for ratification. Consequently the supreme court of the state, by a decision handed down on December 4, 1860, in the case of Duncombe vs. Prindle, 12 Iowa I, which had been appealed from the district court of Webster county, declared the act of March 11, 1858, unconstitutional.
The case which was a test case, was based upon a suit instituted in Webster county, upon a promissory note for one hundred and twenty-five dollars, dated October, 1858, and payable at thirty days. The defendant set out by way of answer, that he resided in township 90, range 28, west of the 5th P. M., which township was situated within the boundaries of Humboldt county, as he claimed would more fully appear by an act approved January 28, 1857, entitled, "An Act to create the County of Humboldt ;" and "An Act explanatory of the act, entitled, 'An Act to create the County of Humboldt,' " approved March 11, 1858, which act set forth, that in the first named act, townships 90, 91, 92 and 93 in ranges 27, 28, 29 and 30, were erected into the county of Humboldt, according to the language of the original bill as passed, but that in the printing and publication of this act, township 90, in the ranges of 27 to 30 inclusive, were omitted. The defendant claimed, that this omission was afterwards supplied by the explana- tory act aforesaid (of March 1I, 1858), and, therefore, not having been sued in his own proper county, he demanded a change of venue to Humboldt county.
The plaintiff, in his replication, controverted the affirmative statements in the answer, proffered a certified copy of the original manuscript act, approved Jan- uary 28, 1857, as found enrolled in the secretary's office, and averred that there was in fact no conflict or discrepancy between the original manuscript of the act and the same act as published. The plaintiff insisted that the facts set out in the preamble of the supposed explanatory act of 1858 were untrue. He alleged, that if by this last act the defendant insisted that township 90, of the ranges aforesaid, had been made a part of Humboldt county, that still said law was inoperative, and could have no binding effect, until it had been submitted to the people of Webster and Humboldt counties, to be voted upon at a general election. and approved by a majority of the votes of each county. Such vote, the plaintiff claimed, as a matter of fact had never been taken.
To this replication the defendant interposed a demurrer which was overruled by the court. Judgment was then rendered for the plaintiff on the note, and the defendant appealed.
The appellant was represented in court by Messrs. Kasson, Cole and Garaghty, while the appellee was represented by Messrs. John F. Duncombe and G. H. Bassett. The decisión, which affirmed that of the district court, was given by Chief Justice Lowe. The court held, that this act did not relate back to the act of which it was amendatory ; and as an independent act it was invalid because it had never been submitted to a vote of the people of the counties concerned. In the closing words of his opinion the court says, "We are compelled to conclude that township 90, in ranges 27 to 30, west of the 5th principal meridian, is still Vol. 1-6
76
HISTORY OF WEBSTER COUNTY
in and forms a part of Webster county. Of course we can pay no attention to conjectural surmises and vague suspicions, which have been made and entertained in relation to some unfairness which may have been practiced in the final passage of the act of 1857, creating the county of Humboldt. If such was the case, no evidence of the fact has been presented to us. We have had to deal with the case as made ; and the record as spread before us."
The result of this decision was to reduce Humboldt county in size to the dimensions which the act of January 28, 1857, had given it, whether as approved this act expressed the real intention of its framers or not. The county, however, should be considered as containing sixteen townships from March 11, 1858, the date of the approval of the amendatory act, until the same was declared uncon- stitutional on December 4, 1860.
It may seem strange to class the customs of the pioneers among the early laws of Iowa; but as Dr. B. F. Shambaugh in his book, "History of the Con- stitutions of Iowa." says, "constitutions are not made in a single day, but have evolved by slow degrees from customs, so the rules and regulations .of the claim clubs of early Iowa may be said to be the beginning of its civil govern- ment." The early settlers of Iowa were not a lawless body of men. The cus- toms governing the holding of claims were well and honestly observed. These customs codified into resolutions and by-laws, became the first written laws of the pioneers of Iowa. Squatter constitutions they were. but they were law. These claim clubs were the product of necessity. By cession and purchase the United States held legal title to all lands in Iowa, but the Indians occupied the land, and their right to possession was not denied, until extinguished by formal agreement. Until this was done, legal settlement could not be made by the white citizen. United States statutes at large prohibited settlement upon lands to which the Indian title had not yet been extinguished, and upon lands which were not surveyed. But the tide of immigration could not be stopped. The pioneers pressed ever westward. Claims were staked. Homes were built and farms began. All of these claims were beyond the pale of constitutional law. Yet 10,000 of them were in Iowa before the public surveys began. In law these squatters were trespassers,-in fact they were honest farmers. It was to meet these conditions and to protect what they termed their rights to their claims that the early settlers formed land clubs or claim associations.
The claim club of Fort Dodge was organized and active after Iowa became a state. The records of this association and that of the claim association of Johnson county are the only complete records in existence.
The manuscript records of the claim club of Fort Dodge, discovered sev- eral years ago among the papers of Governor Carpenter, are now carefully preserved by the historical department at Des Moines. From these records it appears, that the first meeting of the claim club of Fort Dodge was held on the 22d of July, 1854. William R. Miller was chosen chairman, and W. A. Young, secretary. According to the minutes of the meeting, the "citizens met pursuant to a call for the purpose of forming a claim law." At this meeting a committee, consisting of Volney Knight and W. A. Young, was chosen to draft a "code of laws," and to report at the next meeting. After some discussion the following motions were passed :
PIONEERS' DAY, AUGUST 19, 1908, OLESON PARK, FORT DODGE
77
HISTORY OF WEBSTER COUNTY
"First, that 320 acres shall constitute a claim. Second, a claim may be held one month by sticking stakes and after that 10 dollars monthly improvements is necessary in order to hold a claim. Also that a cabin 16x16 feet, shingled and enclosed so as to live in it, is valued at $30." The meeting then adjourned to meet at Major Williams store, Monday, July 24, at 7.00 P. M. At the meeting the following by-laws and resolutions were adopted :
"Whereas the land in this vicinity is not in market and may not be soon. We the undersigned claimants deem it necessary in order to secure our lands to form ourselves into a club for the purpose of assisting each other in holding claims, do, hereby form and adopt the following by-laws:
Resolved first. That every person that is an actual claimant is entitled to hold 320 acres of land until such time as it comes into market.
Resolved second. That any person who lives on their claim, or is continually improving the same is an actual claimant.
Resolved third. That staking out a claim and entering the same on our claim book shall hold for one month.
Resolved fourth. That Sio monthly shall hold a claim thereafter.
Resolved fifth. That no man's claim is valid unless he is an actual settler here, or, has a family and has gone after them, in which case he can have one month to go and back.
Resolved sixth. That any person not living up to the requirements of these laws shall forfeit their claim, and, any actual settler who has no claim may settle on the same.
Resolved seventh. That any person going on another's claim that is valid, shall be visited by a commission of three from our club and informed of the facts and if such person persist in their pursuits regardless of the commission or claimant they shall be put off the claim by this club.
Resolved eighth. That the boundaries of these laws shall be 12 miles each way from this place.
Resolved ninth. That this club shall hold its meetings at least once in eachi month.
Resolved tenth. That the officers of this club shall consist of a chairman and secretary.
Resolved eleventh. That the duty of the chairman is to call to order, put all questions, give the casting vote when there is a tie, etc., etc.
Resolved twelfth. That the duty of the secretary is to keep the minutes of the meetings and read the same at the opening of each meeting and have the book and papers in his charge.
Resolved thirteenth. That any or all of the by-laws may be altered or abolished by a majority vote at a regular meeting."
On the offense of "claim-jumping" the records of the Fort Dodge club con- tain this suggestive entry: "On motion of Wm. R. Miller that if any member of this club finds his or any of his friends clames has been jumpt that they inform this club of the fact and that this club forthwith put them off of said claim without trobling the Sivel law."
These squatter constitutions made it possible for the settlers to establish:
78
HISTORY OF WEBSTER COUNTY
homes without immediate payment. They gave color of title, and thus made possible and protected the settlers in their improvements. They gave peaceful possession against the speculator and claim jumper, and even against the govern- ment itself. They fostered and established on the frontier, justice, equality and democracy. The prominence which they gave to the homestead and its rights probably suggested our present homestead exemption laws. On the rude frontier, where lawlessness was the tendency, they upheld the rule of law. The law of these claim clubs was carried by settlers, from Iowa to the new state of Nebraska and formed the basis of the first law there.
The claim clubs were mere makeshifts of government, the outgrowth of con- ditions which made them necessary. However they created a desire and showed the necessity of codified law and established government. So in March, 1853, the citizens of what was then Webster county petitioned Honorable Samuel B. McCall, county judge of Boone county, to which county Webster was at that time attached for revenue and election purposes, to order an election of county officers. The prayer of the petitioners was granted, and an order issued for an election to be held on April 4. 1853. At this election an aggregate of sixty-three votes were cast. Returns were made to Judge McCall, who on April 9. 1853, issued certificates to the ten officers elect, namely : a county judge, a clerk of the district court, a prosecuting attorney, a recorder, a sheriff, a coroner, a school fund commissioner, a surveyor and a drainage commissioner.
Since the first election, some of the offices have been abolished, the names of others have been changed, and a number of new ones have been created. At the present time there are, including the board of five supervisors, thirteen elective officers. The other county officers are: auditor, clerk of court, treas- urer, recorder, sheriff, superintendent of schools, coroner and county attorney. The office of county judge existed from 1853 to 1868, in which year the duties of the office were assumed by the board of supervisors, established 1860. The last drainage commissioner elected was in 1867. The county auditor's office, a sort of overflow from the other offices, was established in 1868. The first incumbent was Wilson Lumpkin, who performed the duties of the office in connection with his duties as clerk. The office of school fund commissioner was abolished in 1857, John Tolman being the last one to hold that position. In 1859, the office of superintendent of common schools was established and the office was filled by S. B. Olney, who was elected at the election held the first Monday in April, 1858. Until the year 1865, the duties of treasurer were performed by the recorder. In that year the two offices were separated and Jared Fuller was elected the first treasurer. The county attorney was at first known as prosecuting attorney. The records show the existence of such an office until the year 1856, when Charles B. Richards was elected. Then until 1886 there was no regularly elected attorney. In that year, by an amendment to the state constitution, the name was changed to county attorney, and Albert E. Clark was elected to the office. In 1873, the journal of the board of super- visors, shows that John F. Duncombe was hired by that body as attorney of Webster county for a term of two years. The thirty-fourth general assembly in 1911, abolished the office of surveyor, the act taking effect July 4, 1911. The last person to fill this office was G. P. Smith. Under the act, abolishing the
HON. W. N. MESERVEY
MRS. W. N. MESERVEY (AMANDA C.)
THE NEW YORK PUBLIC LIBRARY
A; Or, LENOX AND 11 D N FOUNDATIONS.
79
HISTORY OF WEBSTER COUNTY
office of surveyor, the board of supervisors is given authority, if they desire, to hire an officer to be known as county engineer.
Soon after the organization of the county the judge of the fifth judicial district, of which Webster county then formed a part, appointed three com- missioners to select a site and locate a county seat. The commission selected the southwest quarter of section 6, township 87, range 26. Here a town was laid out and named Homer. But the villagers of Fort Dodge were aggressive. Under the leadership of John F. Duncombe and others they began a fight to secure the county seat. On March 3, 1856, John F. Duncombe, Walter C. Will- son and others to the number of 357, presented to the court a petition asking for an election to be held on the first Monday in April, 1856, to vote on the question of the removal of the county seat from Homer to Fort Dodge. While they lived on opposite sides of the county, yet the interests of these two men were mutual. Mr. Duncombe was boosting for Fort Dodge. Mr. Willson, plan- ning for the future, had in mind a division of the county, and the creating of a new county out of the eastern part, with another county seat town. With the petition was also filed a remonstrance signed by George Gregory and 347 others. The court granted the petition, and the election was held April 7, 1856. The canvass of the votes resulted in favor of Fort Dodge by a vote of 407 as against 264 for Homer. Soon after the records were removed to Fort Dodge. The removal of the county seat brought to Fort Dodge, as residents, several county officers, among them Hon. William N. Meservey, who later played an important part in the making of the new county seat town.
By an act of the fifth general assembly, approved January 24. 1855, the unorganized counties of Wright, Kossuth, Humboldt, Winnebago, Palto Alto, Emmet, Pocahontas and Hancock were attached to Webster county for election, judicial and revenue purposes. These counties were all later organized by the county judge of Webster.
There is an interesting incident in connection with the organization of Hum- boldt county. About the first day of April, 1857, Honorable Samuel Rees, then county judge of Webster county, deputized Henry A. Cramer, at that time a resident of Humboldt county, as deputy sheriff and gave him a warrant for the holding of an election in the county on the first Monday in April, with orders to serve the same. Cramer took his warrant and went to Humboldt county ; but found the homes of the settlers deserted, they having fled to Fort Dodge from fear of the Indians, who were at that time reported as being on their way down the Des Moines river. Cramer found food cooked and warm on the stoves. He helped himself to the eatables and returned his warrant unserved. Judge Rees subsequently issued another warrant for an election to be held the first Monday in August, 1857. At this election Major Jonathan Hutchinson, who afterwards became treasurer of Webster county, was elected county judge.
Webster county contains twenty congressional townships. each containing thirty-six sections of land. It has therefore an area of 720 square miles or 460,800 acres. As first organized in 1853 it contained thirty-two congressional townships. During the years 1855 and 1856, this was increased to forty. Upon the organization of Hamilton and Humboldt counties in 1857, Webster county was reduced to its present size.
80
HISTORY OF WEBSTER COUNTY
Webster county is divided into twenty-four civil townships: Badger, Burn- side, Clay, Colfax, Cooper, Dayton, Deer Creek, Douglas, Elkhorn, Fulton, Gowrie, Hardin, Jackson, Johnson, Lost Grove, Newark, Otho, Pleasant Valley, Roland, Sumner, Wahkonsa, Washington, Webster and Yell.
Washington township was the first township organized in the county and embraced all the territory now contained in Webster and Hamilton counties. In August, 1853, County Judge William Pierce, established two new town- ships, Hardin and Webster, and left Washington township all the territory north of township 87 in the county. In 1857, its boundaries were again reduced, when Wahkonsa township was established. These boundaries, with a slight change made in 1870, are the boundaries Washington now contains, to wit : all of township 88, range 27, and sections 1, 12, 13. 24, 25, 26, 35 and 36, of township 88, range 28, east of the Des Moines river.
Hardin township, as organized in 1853, contained all the territory in town- ship 86 of what was then Webster county. By the organization of Yell and Clear Lake townships in 1856, its boundaries were reduced to township 86, ranges 27, 26 and 25 east of the Des Moines river in what was then Webster county. When Hamilton county was organized, Hardin was given its present boundaries, being all of township 86, range 27, east of the Des Moines river.
Webster township as organized in 1853 embraced all the territory in town- ship 87, in what was then Webster county. By the organization of Yell and Clear Lake townships, its boundaries were reduced to that part of township 87. ranges 25, 26 and 27, on the east side of the Des Moines river. After the division of the counties in 1857 the county judge ordered the township reorgan- ized so as to contain only that part of township 87, range 27.
In 1856, six new townships were established namely: Wahkonsa, Yell, Clear Lake, Boon, Cass and Humboldt. Wahkonsa and Yell were in what is now Webster county while Clear Lake, Boon and Cass were in what is now Hamilton. Humboldt township included the northern tier of townships of the present county of Webster, and the southern tier of townships of the present county of Humboldt.
Wahkonsa township, as first organized, had the following boundaries :--- commencing at the northwest corner of said county, thence east on said county line to the range line between ranges 27 and 26, thence south to the correction line, thence south to the northeast corner of section 12, township 88, range 27, thence west to the Des Moines river, thence down said river to the south line of section 8, thence west to county line, thence north on said line to place of beginning. These boundaries were changed March 24, 1857 and the township then embraced all east of the Des Moines river and north of the line between sections 12 and 13, II and 14, 10 and 15, 9 and 16, 8 and 17, 7 and 18, town- ship 88, range 27. Badger township was taken from Wahkonsa township in 1865; and, in 1872, its boundaries were reduced to township 89 and range 28. Wahkonsa now embraces only the city limits of Fort Dodge.
Yell township as originally organized had the following boundaries: con- mencing at the northwest corner of section one, township 87, range 28, thence west to the county line, thence south on said line to the Boone county line, thence east on said line between Webster and Boone county to the Des Moines river,
81
HISTORY OF WEBSTER COUNTY
thence along that as a line to place of beginning. In 1858 it was given its pres- ent boundaries. They embrace all of township 87, range 27, west of the Des Moines river. Clear Lake township, as organized in 1856, embraced all of townships 86, 87, 88 and 89 in ranges 24 and 23, of what is now Hamilton county. Boon township was organized March 3, 1856, and included township 88 and 89, ranges 26 and 25, of what is now Hamilton county. On March 15, this township was divided and township 89, ranges 26 and 25, was called Cass. Humboldt township as organized March 3, 1856, embraced all of townships 90 and 91, in what was then Webster county.
The townships of Otho, Sumner and Douglas were organized in 1857. Otho, as organized March 2, 1857, contained all of township 88, ranges 28 and 29. lying west of the Des Moines river. The township of Elkhorn was detached in 1871, leaving the boundaries of Otho the same as at present, being that part of township 88, of range 28. on the west side of the Des Moines river. Sumner township was organized March 2, 1857, and at that time contained all of town- ship 87, and west of the Des Moines river. With the organization of Burnside township, Sumner was reduced to its present area. By an order of court March 3, 1857. all the territory lying in townships 89 and 90, ranges 29 and 30, on the west side of the Des Moines river were formed into a township named Douglas. On September 20, 1859, the court ordered township 90 of ranges 29 and 30 formed into a township, thus leaving Douglas consisting of township 89, ranges 29 and 30. The new township was named Jackson. Again, on November 6. 1860, another township was formed out of Douglas, and township 89, range 30 was constituted Johnson township, leaving Douglas township its present confines,-all of township 89, range 29, and that part of sections 7, 18, and 19 in township 89, range 28, lying west of the Des Moines river.
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.