USA > Iowa > Cedar County > The history of Cedar County, Iowa : containing a history of the county, its cities, towns, &c. : a biographical directory of its citizens, war record of its volunteers in the late rebellion, general and local statistics, portraits of early settlers and prominent men > Part 46
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 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92
Again defeated, but not discouraged, Mr. Gower determined to " pick the flint and try again," and at the next January (1867) term, he presented another resolution looking to another election on the same proposition. The resolution was adopted by a vote of eight to seven, and the question was ordered to be voted on by the people at the October election. The proposition was de- feated by a majority of 1,374, out of a total vote of 2,496, as follows : for the bridge, 561 : against the bridge, 1,935.
" From October, 1867 to 1870, Mr. Gower permitted the matter to remain in abeyance, but in the year last named." continues Mr. Longley, "at Mr. Gower's personal request, another committee, consisting of Van Ness. Sharp and Downing, was sent to the Ferry, and reported to the Board that it was a site ' entirely suitable and practicable.' Then the scheme of raising stock, in which the county should hold one-half, was again pushed forward, until the County Attorney filed an opinion that the county could not legally take stock in a toll bridge. In 1874, the matter was again before the public, and the Board deciding this time in favor of Gray's Ford, a vote was ordered for or against a bridge at that point. Result: 780 votes for, and 1,762 votes against the proposition."
No further action was taken in regard to the enterprise until the Spring of 1876, although it is not reasonable to suppose that one who had always been as plucky as Mr. Robert Gower, had been idle or indifferent during these two years. On the other hand, it is fair to presume that he was wide awake and quietly working to compass his ends and secure a bridge at his ferry.
On the 4th day of April, 1876, a petition, signed by 621 voters and tax- payers, was presented to the Board of Supervisors, asking for an appropriation of $15,000,* for bridge purposes at Cedar Bluff. On motion, the consideration of the petition was deferred until the next day, the 5th.
At the appointed time, the bridge petition was called up, when C. P. Shel- don offered the following, and moved its adoption :
Resolved, By the Board of Supervisors, that we take immediate steps toward ascertaining the cost of bridging the Cedar River, at Cedar Bluff, or Gower's Ferry, by appointing a committee to examine and report, or otherwise, with a view of building a bridge at that point, provided, a good and substantial bridge can be built by an appropriation of $15,000.
*When the petition asking for an appropriation of $15,000 was drawn and signed, it was generally understood and believed that this amount was the legal limit. The Legislature that had recently adjourned, had, however, increased the limit to $25,000.
398
HISTORY OF CEDAR COUNTY.
The motion to adopt was seconded by E. N. Smith, when D. T. Hedge offered the following as a substitute, and moved its adoption :
Resolved, That the Auditor be authorized to correspond with bridge companies for iron bridges of different lengths, from 400 feet to 600 feet, and also with masons for building abut- ments and piers, for the purpose of ascertaining the cost of building a bridge across Cedar River.
The motion to adopt was seconded by E. N. Smith, the yeas and nays were called, and the substitute was lost. The original resolution was then adopted. O. H. Helmer, C. P. Sheldon and H. G. Coe were appointed a Committee to ascertain the width of the river, etc., at Cedar Bluff.
At the June session, a petition signed by 1,584 persons, tax-payers and voters, was presented to the Board, praying for an appropriation of money to build a bridge at or near Gray's Ford, or, in the language of the petition, "within one mile of a point where a line drawn from Tipton to the southeast corner of the county crosses Cedar River." The petition was presented, and its request strongly advocated by D. Morrison, Elwood Macey, H. C. Gill, Thomas James, E. A. Gray and others. Beyond the reception of the petition and listening to the arguments in its favor, the Supervisors took no action in regard to it.
After the presentation of this petition, the Committee of Examination, ap- pointed in April, submitted their report, as follows :
Your Committee, appointed under a resolution adopted at the April meeting to visit and ex- amine the site at Gower's Ferry, with a view of bridging the Cedar River at that point, would respectfully report that we have complied with that part of the resolution, and found an excel- lent site for building a bridge, with a solid stone bottom extending up the bank, so that at the depth of two or three feet a solid stone foundation for abutments, with good approaches, can be obtained ; and that we have further corresponded with all the reliable bridge companies in the State. and have received some estimates, but nothing definite.
The report was adopted.
Supervisor Coe then offered the following preamble and resolution :
WHEREAS, Believing that two bridges over Cedar River, in this county, will best subserve the interests of the citizens of the county, and also believing that a place on Cedar River, called Cedar Bluff or Gower's Ferry, is the most suitable point for the erection of said bridge; therefore
Resolved, That the Board of Supervisors, before the final adjournment of this session, take the necessary measures for the building of a bridge at the point above named ; provided, that there is sufficient guaranty given to the Board of Supervisors that the west abutment and the approaches to said bridge shall be built without expense to the county, and built according to the plans and specifications approved by the Board.
The resolution was thien put upon its passage, and the yeas and nays being called, the vote stood-
Yeus-O. H. Helmer, H. G. Coe, C. P. Sheldon-3; Nays-D. T. Hedges, E. N. Smith-2. The resolution was adopted.
The Guaranty .- At the April session, Sewall Gower, representing the in- terest of his father (then deceased), Robert Gower, presented the following guaranty, as required in a resolution already quoted :
The undersigned agree to pay Cedar County twelve hundred dollars, in full payment of all accounts and demands of every character, and final settlement of charges growing out of build- ing the west abutment of the Cedar River bridge, said money to be paid on or before the first day of April, A. D. 1877. (Signed) SEWALL GOWER,
S. C. GUNSOLUS, ED. SEITZINGER.
Below this instrument is the following :
"On motion, the foregoing was accepted when it is signed by Ed Seitzinger."
June 8 (1876), the Auditor was directed to advertise for proposals to be re- ceived until Thursday, July 6, 1876, for bids for the erection of the bridge. Of this determination to build a bridge, Mr. Longley, editor of the Advertiser, said : "Whatever any of us may think as to the wisdom of the decision upon its site, all will no doubt applaud the determination of the Board to use its
399
HISTORY OF CEDAR COUNTY
newly acquired authority* and construct a bridge somewhere without longer fooling or delay."
According to advertisement, the letting of the contract occurred on the 6th of July, 1876, referring to which the Engineering News (a paper devoted to civil engineering interests), of July 22, said :
" The site selected is at a narrow gorge in the river, just below where the channel is hemmed in by perpendicular walls of magnesian limestone, forty feet high. The channel here is about 460 feet wide, and has a solid rock bottom, and the water at its lowest stage is about two and a half feet deep. The stone for the piers and abutments will be taken from the magnesian beds in the vicinity ; the haulage will probably not exceed one-half a mile. The stone used has very regular beds a nd stratification, so that the work of cutting is small.
" The specifications adopted by the County Board of Supervisors were as follows :
" Extreme length of bridge, 540 feet; width of roadway, 16 feet ; floor plank and floor joists to be of h ard pine, the plank three inches thick ; the bridge, if not of iron, to be with or without iron floor beams ; moving load to be 80 pounds per square foot.
" No iron to be strained over 15,000 pounds per square inch in tension, 8,000 pounds per square inch in shearing, and 9,000 pounds per square inch in compression, by Gordon's formula for strains of material.
"Substructure to be completed by October 1, 1876, and superstructure by December 1, 1876.
" At the letting, the following bids were received. Trusses all iron. The bids by the lineal foot :
" Howe truss, $22 85 Clinton, Smith Bridge Company.
" Pratt truss, 20 25 Z. King, 66
" Pratt truss, 21 40 Missouri Valley 66 06
" Pratt truss, 20 75 Canton, Ohio, 66'
" Whipple truss, 23 50 Cincinnati
"Combination wood and iron trusses, top chord and posts wood :
" Pratt truss, $14 49 Raymond & Campbell.
" Pratt truss, 14 40 Missouri Valley.
" Pratt truss, 16 75 Z. King.
" Howe truss. 16 28 Clinton, Smith.
" Pratt truss, 14 75 King, of Kansas.
" Arch girders, all iron :
" Arch. $20 00 Canton, Ohio, Bridge Company.
" Arch. 21 00 King, 66
" Arch. 17 80 Missouri Valley “
"The second truss of the above list was awarded the contract at $20 25 per lineal foot. The specifications are as follows :
" Extreme length of span, 135 feet ; center to center, 133} feet ; rise of trusses, 21} feet ; from center to center, 20 feet ; width of roadway, 16 feet; rolling load per lineal foot, 1,280 pounds ; dead load per lineal foot, 520 pounds; factor of safety, 4, and strains as per specifica- tions of the Board.
" By the strain sheet submitted, the greatest strain upon the top chords was 100,000 pounds-section, 14 square inches; greatest strain upon the bottom chord, 92,000 pounds-sec- tion 62 square inches ; greatest strain upon posts, 64,000 pounds-section 13 square inches.
" The substructure requires 866 cubic yards of masonry, the bids upon which were as follows:
CONTRACTORS.
MASONRY pr. cu. yd.
RIPRAP pr. cu. yd.
EXCAVAT' N pr. cu. yd.
O' Hanlon & O'Harra.
$9 00
Bealer & Co.
·
7 50
75
50
E. S. Gulick
7 75
100
D. Armstrong.
8 70
W. Lancaster (piers).
9 25
W. Lancaster (abutments)
8 00
Z. King
8 50
80
Clinton Smith Bridge Company ..
7 87
Missouri Valley Bridge Company
8 00
Cincinnati Bridge Company (piers)
8 90
Cincinnati Bridge Company (abutments).
6 95
40
25
" The substructure was let to O' Hanlon & O' Harra, at $9.00 per cubic yard, they to do all excavation needed and furnish all riprap required, free of charge to the county."
* Referring to a recent act of the General Assembly by which the amount which a County Board was per- mitted to appropriate for a single bridge, without submitting to a popular vote, was largely increased.
400
HISTORY OF CEDAR COUNTY.
The price agreed upon brought the entire cost of the bridge up to about $21,000. At the same session of the Board at which the contract was awarded, the appropriation was increased from $15,000 to $16,500. To this add $1,200 guaranteed by the Gower interest, and the whole amount provided was $17,700, leaving $3,300 unprovided for. This deficiency was paid as any ordinary account against the county-the bills for the same being audited and ordered paid from the treasury without making an appropriation for that specific pur- pose. The bridge was finally examined, tested and accepted by the Board of
Supervisors, on the 24th of January, 1877. And so, "ten years later," says Mr. Longley, " than becomes a county with the prosperity and population of Cedar (and about two years after her second bridge should have been completed), we had the pleasure, last Monday, of crossing the handsome and substantial structure which now connects her East with her West beyond the caprice of an uncertain river. The structure stands twenty-three feet above low water mark, and if skill and care can be depended upon, it will con- tinue to stand there whether the water be high or low."
The Board of Supervisors, when they determined to "quit fooling" about building a bridge, and to build one, and selected the site for it at Cedar Bluff, were made the subject of pretty severe criticism. C. P. Sheldon, especially, was singled out by some of the opposing interests, and pretty severely handled by them for his action in the premises, he being favorable to the Cedar Bluff site. It was charged by some, that he had allowed himself to be over persuaded in favor of that site, when his convictions and better judgment were really with the Gray's Ford site, in favor of which a large number of tax-payers and voters had petitioned. Mr. Sheldon's standing and reputation among his immediate neighbors raises him too high to justify any such charges, and after two years have passed away and the passions of the people have had time to cool off, his actions in the premises are seen in a different light. Justice is sometimes slow, but it is always sure; and time and its developments have thoroughly vindicated him as an honorable, straight-forward, faithful public servant, and entitled to the respectful consideration of his fellow citizens.
The erection of another iron bridge across Cedar River, either at Rochester or Gray's Ferry, a few miles above Rochester, is under consideration, and there is no reason to doubt that within the next two years another bridge will be made to span Cedar River within the limits of Cedar County.
Other Bridges .- In 1868, a bridge was built across the Wapsipinicon, at Massillon, 1,100 feet in length, costing about $4,000. One-half the cost of this bridge was borne by the county, and the other half by citizens' subscriptions.
In 1877, four other small iron bridges were erected in different parts of the county. Their several locations, length, cost, etc., are as follows :
Springdale, over Wapsienonoc, 40 feet, cost $1,414.
Pioneer Township, over Clear Creek, 24 feet, cost $372.
Fairfield Township, over Sugar Creek, 26 feet, cost $633.
Springfield Township, over Yankee Run, 30 feet, cost $535.
These bridges were built by the Missouri Valley (Iowa) Bridge Company.
CARE OF COUNTY POOR.
Ever since the organization of the county, the unfortunate, the infirm and the poor have been generously and humanely cared for by the county authori- ties. July 2, 1850, the following order was made, which shows the method of securing care and attention for the poor in early times :
Ordered, That the Clerk give notice of the time and place, and proceed to make inquiry at public outcry, who will keep William Brown for the least sum per week for the next three
401
HISTORY OF CEDAR COUNTY.
months, and that the person who will keep the said William Brown, shall have him and shall have the benefit of his labor.
Under the management and direction of the County Commissioners and County Judge, the care and sustenance of the unfortunate was secured by appropriations. Those having the care of the poor would present their accounts, and they would be audited and ordered paid. When the management of county affairs passed under the direction of a Board of Supervisors, a change in the care of the county poor was inaugurated.
April 4, 1871, a farm of 160 acres, being the northeast quarter of Section 25, Township 82, Range 3 west, was purchased by the county from E. C. Smith and Mary E. Smith, his wife, at $40 per acre, amounting in all to $6,400.
At a session of the Board of Supervisors, April 3, 1871, a resolution was passed declaring that County Bonds be issued to the amount of $10,000, bear- ing ten per cent. interest, the interest payable semi-annually, to cancel the debt contracted in the purchase of the above farm, the purchase of farming implements, etc., providing also that the bonds should not be sold for less than par value and accrued interest on said bonds, payable on or before five years from date.
Proposals were invited for the erection of a suitable building, and the con- tract was awarded to J. E. Coudry, of Stanwood, for $1,750. A barn and other outbuildings have been built since.
STATEMENT OF THE PURCHASE OF THE POOR FARM.
E. C. SMITH, Dr.
To Cash ..
$2,023 75 2,500 00
Bonds to E. Smith
Bonds to E. C. Smith. 1,500 00
$6,023 75
CONTRA, Cr.
By 160 acres of land, $40 per acre $6,400 00
By interest on same for 19 days.
33 75
$6,433 75
Cedar School Fund Mortgage.
410 00
$6,023 75
There are at present 14 persons on the county farm, which is in charge of Walter Jeffries.
The following is an official list of the county officers, as nearly perfect as it is possible to compile it. Some of the early records are missing, so that it was impossible for Mr. Carroll, the County Auditor, to make it entirely full and complete :
COUNTY OFFICERS PAST AND PRESENT.
Senators-J. J. Matthews, 1855; J. W. Cattell, 1856-58; J. M. Kent, 1859-63; Henry Wharton, 1864-67 ; W. P. Wolf, 1868-71 ; J. C. Chambers, 1872-75 ; H. C. Carr. 1876-78.
Representatives - Amos Witter, 1852-53; A. D. Graham, 1854-55; Ed. Wright, 1856-57 ; Ed. Wright and Wm. Lundy, 1858-59; Ed. Wright, 1860-61; J. H. Rothrock and H. C. Loomis, 1862-3; J. W. Stanton and W. P. Wolf, 1864-65 ; Ed. Wright, 1866; C. P. Sheldon, 1867 ; W. S. Chase and C. P. Sheldon, 1868-69; J. Q. Tufts and J. W. Beatty, 1870-73; J. Q. Tufts and Henry Wharton, 1874-75; R. G. Scott and Alex. Moffett, 1876-77; Elwood Macy, 1878.
County Judges *- S. A. Bissell, 1852-55 ; Wells Spicer, 1856-57; Geo. Smith, 1858-59; W. P. Cowan, 1860 -- 61 ; J. C. Betts, 1862-68.
Auditor-The office of Auditor was created under the law abolishing the office of County Judge. The same law provided that the County Judges should serve as County Auditors until the first regular election next succeeding, and J. C. Betts being County Judge became County
* Office of County Judge discontinued; office of Auditor created, 1868.
402
HISTORY OF CEDAR COUNTY.
Auditor, and served until January 1, 1869. In October, 1871, E. M. Brink, was elected to suc- ceed Betts, and served until January, 1874. October, 1873, Moreau Carroll was elected as Brink's successor, and re-elected in 1875 and again in 1877.
Clerks-Wm. K. Whittelsey, -; Jno. P. Cook, 1841; Patterson Fleming, 1842, resigned Aug. 14, 1844; John Culbertson, 1844-47; James H. Leech, Jan. 1, 1848, to Sept. 1848; Saml. D. McCauley, 1848-49; Jos. K. Snyder, 1850-51 ; J. W. Cattell, 1852-55; S. W. Young, 1856-58; Saml. Stafford, 1859; Alonzo Shaw, 1860-64 ; Sylvanus Yates, 1865-68; Wm. Elliott, 1869-72; W. H. Van Ness, 1873-76; T. C. Prescott, 1877-78.
Treasurers-Wm. K. Whittelsey, 1848-49; J. C. Betts, 1850-55; H. C. Piatt, 1856-59; Saml. Wampler, 1860-61; G. P. Ingman, 1862-67 ; E. H. Pound, 1868-71 ; T. C. McClelland, 1872-73 ; Saml. Wampler, 1874-77; Geo. Huber, 1878.
Recorders-Wm. K. Whittelsey, 1848-49; J. C. Betts, 1850-55 ; H. C. Piatt, 1856-59 ; Saml. Wampler, 1860-61 ; G. P. Ingman, 1862-64; J. C. Betts, 1865-66; Jesse James, 1867-72; C. W. Hawley, 1873-78.
Sheriff's-Geo. McCoy. (-); Patterson Flemming, 1844-47 ; Jas. H. Robinson, 1848-49; Charles Sweatland, 1850-53 ; J. H. Birely, 1854-57; George Huber, 1858-59; J. L. Bradshaw, 1860-61 ; David Platner, 1862-65; J. D. Shearer, 1866-75 ; A. B. Maynard, 1876-78.
Supt. of Schools-Joshua Maynard, 1858-59 ; Jas. McClung, 1860-61; W. P. Wolf, 1862- 63; C. A. Pound, 1864-67; E. L. Bassett, 1868-69; A. B. Oakley, 1870; C. W. Rollins, 1871- 75; Eunice E. Frink, 1876-78.
Surveyors-A. Shaw, 1849 ; Saml. Dewell, 1850-55; Geo. Whister, 1856-57; M. G. Miller, 1858-61; L. D. Durbin, 1862; Jas. McClung, 1863-65; F. A. Gates, 1866-67 ; M. G. Miller, 1868-73; F. A. Gates, 1874-75; M. G. Miller, 1876; S. Y. Yates, 1877; John Buck, 1878.
Coroners-Andrew Ford, 1854-55; Jacob Shawver, 1856-57; C. A. Pound, 1858-59; A. Parsons, 1860-61; Noah Green, 1862-63; G. W. Smith, 1864-65; T. James, 1866-67; W. H. Hammond, 1868-69; A. Parsons, 1870-71; B Wilhelm, 1872-75; L. L. Sweet, 1876-78.
Chairmen Board of Supervisors + -C. P. Sheldon, 1861-62; Henry Wharton, 1863 ; C. P. Sheldon, 1864-66 ; Jno. Leith, 1867-68 ; J. P. Ferguson, 1869-70; S. W. Young, 1871; H. C. Gill, 1872-73 ; Alex. Moffit, 1874; H. G. Coe, 1875; O. H. Helmer, 1876; N. E. Smith, 1877; D. T. Hedges, 1878.
Drainage Commissioners-R. Gower, 1860-67.1
County Assessors-C. Sweatland, 1850-53; Saml. Hanlin, 1857.
School Fund Commissioners | - Wm. Mason, 1847-49; P. J. Friend, 1850; Wm. Morton, 1851-53 ; J. K. Snyder, 1854-58.
FIRST COURTS.
Judge Tuthill states that, in 1842, he saw and examined the old book of records of the District Court in Cedar County, and made a memorandum of its contents, from which it appears that the first session of the District Court was held at Rochester, on Monday, May 28, 1838. Present, Hon. David Irwin, Judge; Wm. W. Chapman, District Attorney for the U. S., and -- , U. S. Marshal. (The name of the Marshal is not given, but he was paid for 125 miles' travel.)
The appointment of Robert G. Roberts as Clerk of the Court was announced, and lie filed a bond, in the penal sum of $2,000, for the faithful performance of his duties, with Martin Baker, James W. Tallman, Richard Knott, George McCoy and Stephen Toney as his sureties, and entered upon the discharge of his duties.
I. C. Hastings, Esq., was appointed District Attorney pro tem. for Cedar County. The Sheriff's name is not given ; but the name of James W. Tallman, Sheriff, is appended to the return of a writ, dated June 23, 1838.
The Grand Jury for the United States was composed of the following per- sons :
Jehu Kenworthy, Foreman; Alanson Pope, Henry B. Burnap, Martin Baker, Jonathan Morgan, Solomon Knott, Abraham Nix, Henry Hardman, William Miller, Richard Knott, James Sutford, Abraham Kiser, John W. Wil- kinson, William Morgan, W. A. Rigby, James W. Doty, Stephen Toney, John
f Board of Supervisors created 1861.
Į Drainage Commissioners discontinued in 1867.
School Fund Commissioner discontinued in 1858.
403
HISTORY OF CEDAR COUNTY.
C. Higginson, Robert Miller, Conrad Switzer, Henry D. Brown and William Green.
This Grand Jury was impaneled, sworn and charged by the Court; retired; and, after a short time, returned, and stated that they had no business before them, and were discharged.
The Territorial Grand Jury were :
Charles Whittlesey, Foreman ; William Mason, Elias Eplerson, Felix Free- land, Benjamin Fraseur, David W. Walton, James Buchanan, Daniel Hare, Hector Sterritt, William Stoutt, John Jones, Elisha E. Edwards, George McCoy, Nathaniel Baker, John McMain, Jesse Toney, Arthur Dillon, Thomas Lingle, Richard Knott, William Green, John Blaylock.
The Petit Jury, on the part of the United States, were :
William Baker, Moses B. Church, James A. Porter, Robert Miller, John Leverich, Orrin Lewis, James Leverich, Jr., Solomon Knott, Clement Squires, James Sutford, Stephen Toney, Jonathan Morgan.
This jury was not impaneled, as there were no cases tried at the term.
No business whatever was transacted, save making the orders to pay the offi- cers and jurors for one day's attendance and mileage; and on the same day, the Court adjourned until the first day of the next term.
The second term of the District Court was held at Rochester, on Monday, the 1st day of October, A. D. 1838. The Judge not being in attendance, the Court was adjourned, from day to day, by the Clerk, Robert G. Roberts, until Friday, October 5th, when it went over to the next regular term, by operation of law.
*Elisha E. Edwards, Sheriff, not being present, Harvey B. Burnap, the Cor- oner, acted in his stead.
The only case on the docket was Allen Scott rs. Jacob Fought and Daniel Hare.
THE DISTRICT COURT.
Article 5 of Section 6, in both the old and new Constitution of Iowa, con- tains the following :
SEC. 5. The District Court shall consist of a single Judge, who shall be elected by the qualified electors of the district in which he resides. * * *
SEC. 6. The District Court shall be a court of law and equity, which shall be of distinct and separate jurisdiction, and have jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters arising in their respect- ive districts in such manner as shall be prescribed by law.
We are compelled to chronicle the fact of the absence of Book A, of the District Court, which contains the records of the court from the time of its first session in the house of Stephen Toney, in Rochester, in the Spring of 1838; therefore, this history of the District Court, will, aside from the first meeting at the house of Stephen Toney in Rochester, and the first grand and petit jurors, commence with the July term of 1840.
At the first and second sessions of the Board of Commissioners of Cedar County in April and May of 1838, they agreed with Stephen Toney, " that said Toney was to furnish a house for the accommodation of the first session of the District Court. The Commissioners selected the following named persons to serve as grand and petit jurors at the first session of the court.
GRAND JURORS.
Alanson Pope, Solomon Knott. Jehu Kenworthy, Martin Baker, William Mason, Harvey B. Burnap, John Jones. Jonathan Morgan, Robert G. Roberts,
* Commission of Robert Lucas, Governor, to Elisha E. Edwards, as Sheriff, is dated September 22, 1838. He was sworn in October 1, 1838.
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.