USA > Iowa > Story County > History of Story County, Iowa: A Record of Settlement, Organization. > Part 53
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
Troubles such as Story County had with Grant Ditch Nc 5, along in 1903, 1904 and 1905, were experienced about the same time in numer- ous other counties; for the general revival in prosperity which began near the close of the last century was enhancing rapidly the value of Iowa land and the drainage of its wet places was looking more and more like a business proposition. Hence there arose a strong demand for a ditch law that would work. Constitutional difficulties were sought to be re- moved by proposing an amendment to the constitution which was ulti- mately adopted; but pending its adoption a fiction was devised that the drainage of wet farms was necessary to the public health when a petition should be presented to the board of supervisors and it should appear that the benefits to the land would be more than the cost of the ditch. A law to this effect was passed in 1906 and the supreme court, being by this time also favorable to ditches as well as the legislature, the law was sustained and under its provisions the ditch business has been pushed steadily forward.
The first of the ditches to be built in the county under the new law were Warren-McCallsburg No. 8, Colo-New Albany No. 9, Richland No. 10, and Warren No. 11. These, however, were not especially large proj- ects as the matter is now understood and though there was dissension enough concerning them, they were handled without being thrashed out in the courts. But along with all but the first two of these ditches, and lasting considerably longer than any of them, was the Marshall-Story Ditch No. I. This was a relatively large project, and insomuch as it ex- tended into the two counties, the boards of supervisors of Marshall and Story Counties acted together in its administration. The ditch had its outlet in Marshall county but the territory it drained was largely on the Moraine in New Albany and Sherman Townships of Story County. It had several long branches, one of which, known as "C, branch," had suffi- cient fall so that it might outlet above ground before its junction with the main ditch. Not only did the drain as a whole involve an expenditure
Digitized by Google
460
HISTORY OF STORY COUNTY
around $50,000, but the conditions surrounding it were sufficiently com- plicated so that about all of the questions that would conveniently be thought of concerning rules of assessment were raised. Out of this case the Story County officials, engineers, attorneys and many litigants got their education in ditch law. When the assessments against land owners had been made to pay for the ditch, a few of the number through whose land the large tile near the outlet was being constructed were satisfied with the share allotted to them; but generally the land owners objected and appealed from the finding of the district commissioners and the board of supervisors to the district court. The assessments had been appor- tioned according to what was known as the Ashbaugh system, which rep- resented the first serious attempt to reduce to rule the matter of ditch assessments, and the reasoning upon which the rule was founded was dis- tinctly favorable to the parties down the ditch and correspondingly un- favorable to the parties around the head waters of the drainage basin. The appeals were sufficiently numerous to raise all the points there were in the case and the whole matter was tried before Judge Lee in one pro- ceeding. In this situation there was a medley of disputes and the matter was thrashed out, presented and argued from all angles. Further this was the first case to be tried in any county of the state involving proceed- ings under the new ditch law. When the trial was over and the judge with the contending attorneys and the engineer had been out for a drive over the district the judge rendered his decision re- ducing the assessment on some of the pieces at the upper end of the ditch but not undertaking, either to lay down a new rule of assessment or to perfect the Ashbaugh rule. Such a decision might not seem to settle very much but somehow it has not since been necessary in the county, not- withstanding a very large increase in the ditch business, to have any such wrangle over a ditch assessment again. Officials, attorneys, engineer and others have understood themselves and the ditch subject very much better since the trial of that case. In respect to other ditches there have been occasional appeals and occasionally an appellant has gotten a reduction in his assessment; but the general idea has prevailed that the ditches are a good thing, that they are bound to be built, and when built will have to be paid for; and that the assessments which officials know now how to make will, for the most part, stand in the courts.
Since the Marshall-Story case was started there have been also started some thirty-five county ditches and eight or ten joint county ditches. Some of these ditches have made small progress while others are completed and paid for. But altogether they stand for a tremendous volume of real estate improvement. Steadily the ditches have been multiplied and their scope enlarged until through considerable sections of the county they lie snugly together separated only by their respective water sheds. In other cases the projects are small and, in fact, represent only the effort of one or two progressive farmers to force the drain they need through the
Digitized by Google
1
!
--- - ----
: :
1 : 1 !
:
!
:
,
ยท
i
:
1
HISTORY OF STORY COUNTY
461
land of an unaccommodating neighbor. But, large or small, they stand for a general and effective purpose to develop the productive resources of the county. The construction of everyone of these ditches is followed by probably an equal expenditure for connecting tile drains on farms where the outlet is now provided. It would probably be a very moderate estimate that since the systematic movement began the county has put a million dollars into public and private drains; and when, later, the corn is seen waving where had been a profitless swale the value of the improvement is appreciated. In the most of this more important work the engineer in charge has been John M. Wells, the county surveyor; and any just record of the county's achievement in this regard must accord to him a liberal measure of credit.
Vol. 1-80
1 1 -
1
-
Digitized by
CHAPTER XLVI.
POLITICS OF LAST DECADE.
In the politics of the last decade, Story County has been principally a Cummins County. The present senator and former governor had long had many admirers in the county; and when he was a candidate for the senatorship in 1899 against Senator Gear, Story County heartily endorsed him, and its senator, Fitchpatrick, and representative, Veneman, were both favorable to him. His senatorial candidacy, however, having proved unsuccessful, his later candidacy for governor, in 1901, found ready ap- proval in the county. There was at the time a difference of opinion, even among his friends, as to the advisability of his candidacy; but the Re- publican county convention endorsed him by twenty majority, and a fight- ing delegation went to Cedar Rapids in his behalf. In the course of the next few years, not only the state, but the counties as well, aligned their politics more and more according to whether one did or did not co- operate with or support Gov. Cummins in his aspirations and policies; but, in Story County, the Cummins sentiment upon the whole gained steadily. Only once in all the years of the Cummins fight did the county fail to sup- port the governor. In the spring of 1904 it came about that the attitude of the county was important in the matter of electing delegates to the Re- publican National convention; and both the Cummins side and the other side, which about this time came to be known as the "standpat" side, ran candidates for national delegates. The result was a hot and close fight; and the endorsement by the county convention of Dr. J. I. Hostetter of Colo, standpat candidate, as the county's candidate for delegate against W. J. Veneman, who was supported by the Cummins or "Progressive" faction. Hostetter was duly elected by the district convention; but the local standpat victory was never repeated.
The Biennial Elections Amendment was adopted in the fall of 1904, and there was neither state nor county convention in 1905, but in 1906, when Cummins ran the third time for governor, Story County held a primary and endorsed Cummins by nearly 1200 majority over Editor Perkins of Sioux City. In 1908, when Cummins was a candidate for senator against Senator Allison, he again received the support of the county, although his majority this time was held down to nearly 700, which, under the circum- stances, was a good deal for the opposition to do. After the death of
462
Digitized by Google
.-.-
468
HISTORY OF STORY COUNTY
Senator Allison in August of that year, and the calling by the general assembly of the second primary in connection with the November election, the sentiment of the county became more pronounced, and the majority for Cummins over Lacey was between 1600 and 1700.
Along with the Cummins fight was the biennial contest between Cap- tain Hull and Judge Prouty, both of Des Moines, for the former's seat in congress. The fight began in 1902, following Cummins' first nomination for governor, and there was a desperate and very uncertain fight for the Polk delegation; but Hull carried the two largest precincts of Des Moines by an aggregate majority of 20 votes and so secured the Polk delegation. In this contest, the friends of Capt. Hull controlled the Polk County Re- publican committee, and though the opposition submitted to the result, they felt quite strongly that they had been defrauded and charges of un- fair treatment were freely made. Partly or wholly on this account and after the Polk County primary, wherein Prouty had been substantially eliminated as a candidate by his defeat in his own county, his friends made a still hunt in Story County and secured his endorsement in the county primaries ; so the Story delegation went to the district convention at Perry opposing Hull; but the other counties fell in for Hull after the Polk convention, and he was easily nominated. In 1904, the Hull-Prouty contest was resumed in Polk County; but conditions had somewhat changed.
Upon this occasion it was the Prouty side that controlled the Polk County committee and that side in its turn, proceeded to protect its own rights according to its own story and to get even for its real or fancied wrongs as the other side understood it. Out of these proceedings, there arose a tissue ballot issue that for a long time figured in the politics of the district and unquestionably reacted disastrously upon Prouty. Hull's victory in Polk was decisive; and in so much, as the standpatters this time carried the Story County convention, there was no break in the unanimity of Hull's renomination. In 1906, upon the occasion of Cum- mins' third candidacy for governor and of Hull's ninth candidacy for congress, a state of armed neutrality was maintained between the Polk County factions. Prouty refrained from running for congress, and Hull and Cummins refrained respectively from bothering each other; so the congressional fight did not get into Story County that year; but in 1908, the primary system having been in the meantime adopted for the state as well as for the county, Prouty once more challenged Hull, this time for the whole district. Attention in the canvass was for the most part centered on the Cummins-Allison fight; but when the votes were counted, the congressional vote was found to be desperately close, and Hull was finally renominated over Prouty, after various recountings, by about forty votes. In this election, Prouty's majority in the county was officially declared to be 184, which was not very much for that side in Story County. In 1908, the same fight was renewed; but this time Hull's
Digitized by Google
464
HISTORY OF STORY COUNTY
friends, many of them, ceased to fight for him. Prouty carried Story County by more than 1,000, and the district by 3,000.
A local matter that figured in these two last fights was the post office building at Ames. Just prior to the primaries of 1908, Congressman Hull secured the passage through congress of a bill for the erection of a gov- ernment building for post office purposes at Ames. This local improve- ment was much appreciated; and while the voters at Ames did not all vote for Hull on its account, many of them did feel under obligations to re- frain from voting against him. In 1910, however, the novelty of the post office had worn off, and no actual beginning had been made for the erection of the post office; so the people of Ames appeared to regard that obliga- tion as canceled, and Ames went for Prouty with the rest of the county and the district.
In 1908, Chas. R. Quade of Ames was elected delegate from the Sev- enth District to the Republican National convention and co-operated in the nomination of President Taft. This election calls to attention the fact that while Story County has missed congressional and other honors of the first order, it has been singularly successful in getting delegates to the Republican National conventions. The series of victories in this respect began with the election of W. D. Lucas of Ames from the old Ninth District in 1880, he going to Chicago for Blaine and ultimately joining in the nomination of Garfield. In 1884, in the Tenth District, as it was then constituted, Story County was not able to get a delegate; but Oley Nelson of Sheldahl was made an alternate. In 1888, Story being freshly in the Seventh District, D. A. Bigelow of Ames was endorsed by the county, and was promptly accepted, particularly by Major Conger's friends in Dallas and other counties, and was easily elected. He went to the convention for Allison, but voted finally for Harrison. In 1892, H. C. Boardman, who was then chairman of the county committee and after- wards state senator, received the endorsement of the county as a Har- rison man; and Warren County giving similar support to Mr. Berry, the two counties co-operated and with the help of other Harrison men in the district, secured easily the election of both. They went to Minneapolis and voted for Harrison. In 1896, Story County was not able in the first instance to secure a delegate; but J. A. Mills of Nevada was chosen an alternate. Later, his principal, Dr. Bevington, of Winterset, became a candidate for congress, and decided not to attend the convention, and Mr. Mills was thus promoted to sit as a delegate and voted for Allison. In 1900, Story County's claim for this particular honor would have seemed to have been pretty well disposed of; but the situation opened favorably and W. O. Payne of Nevada was presented by the county and was elected without opposition. He went to Philadelphia and voted for Mckinley's second nomination, and also (without much enthusiasm) for Roosevelt's nomination for vice-president. In 1904, as before suggested, Story be- came the pivot for the time being of the Seventh District and presented
Digitized by Google
465
HISTORY OF STORY COUNTY
Dr. Hostetter and secured his election. He went to Chicago and voted for Roosevelt. In 1908, the county presented C. R. Quade as before stated; and although there was some opposition, the record of the county in this respect was not to be broken and he was elected, the sixth delegate to sit from Story County in as many successive Republican National con- ventions. On the other hand, Story County has been directly represented in two Democratic National conventions: E. B. Potter was delegate in 1864 to the Chicago convention, which nominated McClellan and declared the war a failure, and his brother-in-law, E. D. Fenn, was a delegate to the convention of 1880, at Cincinnati, where he gave enthusiastic support to the ultimately successful candidacy of Gen. Hancock.
In the state senate, during the decade, C. J. A. Ericson of Boone and J. A. Fitchpatrick of Nevada have alternated in their service. Mr. Eric- son, having been first elected in 1895, was superseded in 1899 by Mr. Fitchpatrick. In 1903, Mr. Fitchpatrick as the choice of Story County, gracefully retired, and Mr. Ericson, having again secured the endorsement of Boone County at the end of a hard struggle with S. L. Moore, was nominated without opposition in the district convention. Ericson's term was extended one year by the adoption of the Biennial Elections Amend- ments, and in 1908 he again retired, and the primary system having in the meantime . been adopted, Mr. Fitchpatrick was again nominated by the common consent of the Republicans of both counties and served in the sessions of 1909 and 1911.
For the house of representatives, in the same period, W. M. Greeley of Ames, after having been barely defeated by Fitchpatrick for senator in the county primary of 1899, was easily nominated for representative in 1901 and was again chosen in 1903, his term also being extended by the Biennial Elections Amendment. In 1906, and in 1908, Geo. C. White of Nevada was nominated and elected distinctly as a Cummins candidate in the county. In 1910, factional divisions having in a measure disappeared, a lively contest arose over various issues between W. P. George of Ames and M. S. Helland of Slater. It was a vigorous contest and resulted hand- somely in the nomination of Helland. Mr. Helland, however, was taken suddenly ill after the primaries and died two days before the county convention, which passed Resolutions of Regard, and after some balloting, nominated Mr. George, who was duly elected; although in the ensuing election, it is to be recorded that, for the first time, the distinctly Prohibi- tion candidate made a real showing, Lars J. Skromme of Warren Town- ship running on that ticket and getting a considerable heavier vote than the Democratic candidate, although not seriously endangering George's election.
Reference has been several times made to the Biennial Elections Amendment, which was adopted in 1904, abolishing the elections in the odd numbered years and making various changes in the situation in the state. A similar amendment had been adopted by the people in 1900 but
Digitized by Google
466
HISTORY OF STORY COUNTY
had been set aside by the supreme court on the ground of informalities in the form of its submission. The amendment of 1904 was challenged on the ground of inherent defect in that it made various amendments to the constitution, all of which were submitted in a single vote; whereas, the constitutional provision as to amendments is that separate amendments shall be voted upon separately. The question as to the multiplicity of this amendment was raised in Story County in a case originating in Richland Township and entitled Lobaugh vs. Cook, Lobaugh being a township trustee whose term the amendment extended, and Cook, the township clerk. By a general arrangement, the other trustees instructed Cook to post notices changing the place of voting in the township for the election in 1905, and Lobaugh as the trustee liable to have his term again short- ened, undertook to enjoin the posting of such notices. The issue was trivial in itself; but it raised the question of the validity of the amendment and the case attracted much attention in the state. The case was carried through the district court to the supreme court, both courts holding the amendment to be valid; although the reasoning of the courts was variously commented upon by the bar of the state.
In 1898, J. Q. Burgess had been promoted from deputy auditor to auditor, and Jay Page had succeeded Anfin Ersland as recorder. Also, C. M. Soper had entered upon his service in the clerk's office, defeating H. E. Myrah, and in 1900, these officers had been renominated, Geo. Un- derwood, with the others, for county attorney. In 1901, the bunch who had been nominated in 1899, were renominated, and in 1902, C. P. McCord, who had been deputy clerk under Soper, was promoted to the clerkship, and Soper took the deputyship. O. B. Peterson defeated Frank Boynton, the deputy auditor, in a hard fight for the auditorship, and Ole Langland made a very successful run for recorder. In 1903, Fred Hansen, as county superintendent, made the first earnest endeavor to break the two term rule, and he nearly succeeded; but I. C. Welty was nominated by some 200 majority. In this year, E. A. Fawcett, now cashier of the First Na- tional Bank of Nevada, was advanced from the deputy's place to that of treasurer, and W. A. Ricketts of Ames was chosen for his notably suc- cessful term as sheriff. In 1904, the successful candidates of 1902 were renominated, and Edward M. McCall also secured without opposition the nomination for the county attorneyship. In 1906, the Biennial Elec- tions Amendment having thrown out the election of 1905, the whole bunch of county officers came up for renomination or succession, but were mostly renominated. O. B. Peterson, however, retired from the auditor's office and was succeeded by his deputy, F. G. Dunahugh ; and C. M. Soper who had been deputy clerk, under the McCord administration, became chief in the office again. M. L. Tesdall, deputy recorder. was also pro- moted to the chief place in his office in place of Ole Langland. In 1908, Dunahugh, Soper and Tesdall were renominated, and with them were chosen Fred Warrick of Nevada for sheriff; Frank N. Fowler of Ames
Digitized by Google
467
HISTORY OF STORY COUNTY
for treasurer, H. E. Hadley of Nevada, for county attorney, and Ira J. Scott of Ames, for county superintendent, all over a field of opposing candidates. In respect to the office of sheriff, the provision of the law requiring the leading candidate to have at least 35 per cent. of the whole number of votes cast in order to be nominated, became effective, War- rick having a plurality, but lacking a little of the required per cent. This nomination therefore, went to the convention in which, after some ballot- ing, Warrick was nominated. In 1910, Dunahugh in the auditor's office gave way to his deputy, C. A. Batman, who was duly nominated ; but Soper in the clerk's office and Tesdall in the recorder's office challenged the third term rule and although the opposition was vigorous, both were renominated and later elected. Also, the candidates first nominated in 1908 were duly renominated and elected.
-
In all these years the county primaries have commanded, uniformly, the attention of the great body of Republican voters in the county, the attendance at the Republican primary, in fact, being ordinarily, perhaps a thousand larger than the Republican vote in the general election; so great a discrepancy is to be accounted for rather by lack of interest in the election than by the participation in the Republican primary of members of the opposition parties, it being a recognized fact that the membership of the opposition parties has not been especially numerous in the county.
In judicial matters, there have been some fights. In 1901, Judge Weaver having been nominated for supreme judge, a convention was held at Boone to name his successor. Story County presented E. H. Addi- son, and Judge Evans was also a candidate, but the nomination was finally captured by some peculiar convention methods by J. H. Richard of Web- ster City. At this time, the three judgeships of the Eleventh Judicial Dis- trict were held by the three counties of the district which were in the Tenth Congressional District, Richard being from Hamilton County ; Whitaker from Boone County, and Kenyon, who had succeeded Birdsall upon the latter's resignation on account of failing health, from Webster County. In 1902, Kenyon declined a renomination, and there were several candidates for his place. Story County again presented Addison, but Judge Evans was nominated, and Whitaker and Richard were also re- nominated. After this convention, Judge Kenyon resigned, and Mr. Evans declined the temporary appointment. A six months' term in the judgeship was therefore open, for which Governor Cummins appointed Mr. G. W. Dyer of Nevada, who had twice been presented by Story County for judicial honors, in 1894 and 1898, and this appointment was regarded as a worthy recognition. In 1906, Judges Evans, Whitaker and Richard were all candidates for renomination, and the renomination of Judge Evans was generaly conceded, but there was definite opposition to both Whitaker and Richard; and the judicial convention at Iowa Falls was one of unusual interest. Its presiding officer was W. J. Moir of Eldora,
Digitized by Google
.
468
HISTORY OF STORY COUNTY
a veteran politician of the Fifties and Sixties, who had been the presiding officer of the famous congressional convention at Webster City in 1882. After the nomination of Judge Evans by acclamation, the convention set- tled down to balloting for the other judgeships, the candidates, besides the retiring judges, being Lee of Story, Wright of Webster and Williams of Hardin. The balloting continued all the afternoon without result; but, in the end, Webster County, which had sought to nominate its candidate in place of Richard but to hold Whitaker on the bench, was compelled to abandon this alliance with Boone and accept one with Story. This alliance being affected, Judge Wright was nominated on the first ballot after supper, and Judge Lee, of Ames, was nominated on the next ballot. In 1908, the death of Judge Bishop occasioned a vacancy on the supreme bench, to which a Republican State convention, especially called, nominated Judge Evans, thus occasioning a vacancy on the district bench. The nomination for this vacancy was made in a special convention and the balloting resulted, after a time, in the nomination of C. A. Albrook of Eldora. The district bench is thus constituted of Lee, Wright and Albrook, being generally re- garded as quite as satisfactory, taken as a whole, as any that has ever presided in the county, and the whole bench was unanimously renomi- nated and reelected in 1910.
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.