USA > Illinois > Hancock County > Historical encyclopedia of Illinois and history of Hancock County, Volume II > Part 11
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 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101 | Part 102 | Part 103 | Part 104 | Part 105 | Part 106 | Part 107 | Part 108 | Part 109 | Part 110 | Part 111 | Part 112 | Part 113 | Part 114 | Part 115 | Part 116 | Part 117 | Part 118 | Part 119 | Part 120 | Part 121 | Part 122 | Part 123 | Part 124 | Part 125 | Part 126 | Part 127 | Part 128 | Part 129 | Part 130 | Part 131 | Part 132 | Part 133 | Part 134 | Part 135 | Part 136 | Part 137 | Part 138 | Part 139 | Part 140 | Part 141 | Part 142 | Part 143 | Part 144 | Part 145 | Part 146 | Part 147 | Part 148 | Part 149 | Part 150 | Part 151 | Part 152 | Part 153 | Part 154 | Part 155 | Part 156 | Part 157
UNSUCCESSFUL EFFORTS TO CHANGE COUNTY SEAT
Carthage has continued to be the county seat of this county from 1833 to the present time. There have been two unsuccessful efforts, how- ever, to change the county seat to Warsaw.
The first effort was under an act of the Gen- eral Assembly, in force April 13, 1849, which authorized the legal voters of the county at the next general election of the county officers, to vote for or against the removal of the county seat of the county from the town of Carthage to the town of Warsaw, and that the same rules should be observed in the taking of the votes, and the returns thereof, and in the counting of the votes, and in all other things, as were re- quired by law in elections for senators and rep- resentatives of the General Assembly. The right of contest was given as in case of the election of county officers, and it was provided that any legal voter of the county should have the right to appeal from the decision of such contest to the circuit court of the county.
It was further provided that if it should be found that a majority of the legal voters of the county voting at the election had voted for the removal, the clerk of the County Commissioners Court should make a certificate thereof, showing the number of votes for and against such re- moval, and should enter same of record in his office, and it should then be the duty of the county commissioners, as soon as practicable thereafter, to cause all public offices of the " county, required to be kept at the county seat, to be removed from the town of Carthage to the town of Warsaw, and that the town of War- saw should thereafter be the county seat of the county.
Provision was made in the act for the dona- tion of lots or ground in Warsaw, or the erection thereon of any public buildings for the use of the county, or the doing or performing any other thing in consideration of the county seat being removed to Warsaw, but it was provided that
687
HISTORY OF HANCOCK COUNTY
such provision should contain full specification of the same, and should be binding upon the parties executing and filing such propositions in the office of the clerk of the County Commis- sioners Court, and should have the force and effect of a contract. Any person filing such proposition was required to give bond, with suf- ficient security, to be approved by the county commissioners, payable to the county, and con- ditioned for the faithful performance of his proposition so filed.
In pursuance of this act of the General As- sembly, the question of removal of the county seat from Carthage to Warsaw, was submitted to the legal voters of the county at the general election of county officers in November, 1849.
The act under which this submission of the county seat question to the people was made, was rather favorable to removal. The center of the county was given no advantage, and the majority required to justify removal was not the majority of the legal voters of the county, but the majority of those voting at the elec- tion. Nevertheless, the result was decidedly favorable to Carthage, there being 561 votes for removal, and 1,167 against removal.
SECOND CONTEST FOR REMOVAL OF COUNTY SEAT
There is a marked contrast in the law and procedure as to the removal of a county seat as the same existed in 1849 when the first con- test in this county occurred, and in 1902, the time of the second and last contest.
In 1849, the matter rested in the discretion of the General Assembly, which had power to authorize such an election by special act, and to provide the rules of procedure for such an elec- tion.
In 1902 the action of the Legislature was cir- cumscribed to some extent by the provisions of the constitution of 1870.
It is provided in the constitution of 1870 that no county seat shall be removed until the point to which it is proposed to be removed shall be fixed in pursuance of law, and not until three-fifths of the voters of the county, to be ascertained in such manner as shall be pro- vided by general law, shall have voted in favor of its removal to such point, except when the attempt is to remove the county seat to a point nearer to the center of the county, in which case a majority vote only shall be necessary. It is further provided that no person shall
.vote on the question who has not resided in the county six months, and in the election precinct ninety days, next preceding the election, and that the removal of a county seat shall not be submitted to a vote of the people, oftener than once in ten years.
The General Assembly passed an act in 1872, under this constitutional provision, to provide for the removal of county seats, which act par- ticularly specified the rules of procedure from the inception to the conclusion thereof for the manifest purpose of guarding against fraud, or the opportunity for fraud, in such contests, in view of the fact that these contests were likely to engender feeling and bitterness between dif- ferent sections of the same county, with tempta- tions to use any means available for the pur- pose of retaining the county seat, on the one hand, and, on the other, of securing its removal.
It is not a part of this history to specify the various steps of the procedure prescribed by law for such cases. It is sufficient to state what was done in general terms.
A proceeding was duly initiated in 1902 for the removal of the county seat from Carthage to Warsaw. There had been some discussion of the insufficiency of the courthouse for county purposes, and the fact that a new courthouse was needed, or would probably be erected with- in a few years, may have stimulated Hancock County citizens who favored the removal of a county seat, to begin proceedings to accomplish that end.
The proceedings were brought by representa- tive citizens, assisted by some of the ablest of the county's lawyers, and there was no sub- stantial defect in any of the papers prepared or in the giving of the notices required, and so the way was prepared for an election on the question of removal to be held on the second Tuesday after the first Monday of November, at the usual places of holding elections, as was required by the removal act. The object of the law in prescribing the second Tuesday, instead of the first, for such an election was to separate it entirely from other elections so that there might be no interference with a full and free expressoin of the will of the' people on the ques- tion of removal. The second Tuesday after the first Monday of November, 1902, was Nov. 11.
During the weeks preceding the election the question of the removal of the county seat was greatly agitated, the friends of the two cities participatng actively in the contest. There
688
HISTORY OF HANCOCK COUNTY
were newspaper articles on each side and cir- culars were freely distributed by the friends of each contestant. Finally, a platform cam- paign was inaugurated. This speaking cam- paign became very animated and in some in- stances the expression of opinion was violent and unrestrained. But the people were not moved to deeds of violence, notwithstanding the intensity of their feelings.
As an illustration of the intemperance of language in which county seat contestants some- times indulge, to their shame and mortification afterwards, we refer to two supplements issued by Hancock County newspapers and used as cir- culars, one dated Oct. 31, 1902, favoring War- saw, and the other dated Nov. 5, 1902, favoring Carthage.
In the supplement of Oct. 31st, favoring War- saw, the city and friends of Carthage and their actions in this contest are described in head- lines as the "Chatter of Cormorants," "Some Evidences of Decay and Deterioration," "Let the Galled Jade Wince," "The County Her Prey," "Put Simple Simon to Shame," "Throw- ing Sand in Voters' Eyes," "Deliberate Attempt to Mislead," and "Levity and Insolence." A black-letter paragraph warns the voters not to be deceived by Carthage hirelings and their false statements.
In a publication in the interests of Warsaw, dated Nov. 7, 1902, the people are warned to keep their hands on their pocketbooks because Carthage had turned her lawyers loose.
In the supplement of Nov. 5th, favoring Car- thage, there appear such headlines as, "War- saw's Lying Campaign," "Warsaw's Attempt to Again Soak the People," "It Is a Lie," "Mud," and "A Journalstic Ananias."
In a black-letter paragraph, this supplement states that "upon absolutely no grounds except avarice and hate" Warsaw makes a campaign for the county seat that "rivals in malice, cu- pidity and falsehood anything in history."
The language used by the friends of the two contestants illustrated above is not more violent perhaps than the language used by parties in intense political contests. In fact, it is gen- erally understood that, in such cases, American citizens do not mean what they say, or all they say, and that after the animosity of the con- test shall have been smoothed out by the iron- ing process of time, those who were thus tempo- rarily in such bitter opposition to each other, become again warm friends and faithful com-
rades. The above examples of extreme state- ment are to be regarded by the reader as humor- ous rather than rancorous, as examples of the meaningless criminatory and recriminatory power of English words, and not as indicating any real black-hearted antipathy of one indi- vidual for another.
In 1853, Squire R. Davis, a prominent Han- cock County citizen, published an arithmetic founded upon the idea of concellation. It was an ingenious method of arranging problems for solution, so that the numbers representing the different aspects of the problem were to be ar- ranged in appropriate positions on one or the other side of a perpendicular line and a vast amount of multiplication and division avoided by cancellation of the same factor when ap- pearing on opposite sides. If the vituperative words above selected from the circulars were thus arranged for cancellation according to their signification, there would be nothing left on either side of the line when the process of can- cellation had been completed. In other words, neither party in the contest could claim a pre- eminence in the John J. Ingalls manner of re- ferring to an adversary.
And now, after the lapse of these years, the citizens of Warsaw and Carthage are good friends, and there remains scarcely a trace of the bitterness of the 1902 controversy. Warsaw is mollified by the fact that the majority was decidedly in her favor, while Carthage rejoices in the fact that she retained the county seat, even though by the application of the three- fifths rule.
ELECTION RESULTS
The election was conducted as quietly as such an election could be, where there was such strenuous endeavor on the part of the friends of each of the two cities. The total result was .4,152 votes for removal, that is, in favor of Warsaw, and 3,610 votes against removal, that is, in favor of Carthage. Carthage town- ship cast 794 votes, all of them in favor of Carthage. Warsaw cast 574 votes, all of them in favor of Warsaw. The entire vote of Rocky Run, 194, and of Wilcox, 126, was given to War- saw, while Carthage had two votes out of 308 in Walker, and six votes out of 203 in Wythe, and twenty-seven votes out of 302 in Nauvoo. But the vote in townships adjoining Carthage was more evenly divided. The interest in this
-
Joseph I. Brotts
Carrie Q. Bots
689
HISTORY OF HANCOCK COUNTY
election is shown by the large vote which was polled, being a total of 7,762 votes. One week before, that is, on Nov. 4, 1902, the regular election for state senator and county officers had been held and the number of votes polled was about 1,000 less, ranging from 6,720 for the candidates for county treasurer to 6,779 for the candidates for county clerk. The two candidates for senator received a total of 6,774 votes. It was generally believed at the time that many voters who did not feel like attend- ing both elections permitted the regular county election to go by default in favor of the county seat contest.
The inducements offered by the city of Car- thage were embodied in an ordinance adopted and approved on Oct. 20, 1902, which ordinance is as follows :
"Be it ordained by the city council of the city of Carthage, in the state of Illinois :
Sec. 1. That the free use of the water and sewerage system of said city is hereby granted to Hancock county, for the use of its court- house and jail, so long as the county seat of said county remains in the city of Carthage.
Sec. 2. The city of Carthage shall, as soon as a new courthouse is built in said city, make and lay at its own expense such walks, around the public square and from the streets up to the different sides of the courthouse, as the board of supervisors of said county may from time to time direct to be made, said walks to be made of brick or concrete, the same as said city lays for its own use, and said city shall at all times keep in good repair said walks, at its own expense, and shall also keep in good repair, the public park of said county.
Sec. 3. The said Hancock County shall have the right, free of charge, from time to time, to tap the water mains and sewer system of said city in such manner as the citizens of Carthage are, by the ordinances of said city, permitted to tap the same, and the said county, so long as the county seat thereof remains in said city of Carthage, shall be exempt from any water rents or tax, and shall be exempt from any charge whatever for the use of said water or sewerage system, for the use of its courthouse and jail, and said city will at all times keep the public square in good condition and preserve the trees thereon, and. without auy expense to said county."
The city of Warsaw, early in the contest, of- fered to build a courthouse and jail at a cost
of $75,000, but as the campaign drew to a close, this offer was raised to $80,000, or a little more, represented at first by a subscription, but later by a check for that amount on the Hill-Dodge Banking Company of Warsaw, which check was payable to the proper county official, but was held in the bank during the pendency of the contest. The only question as to this check made by friends of Carthage was the question of delivery.
Warsaw, on its part, challenged the induce- ments held out by Carthage as niggardly, while Carthage, on its part, asserted that the induce- ment held out by Warsaw was an effort to pur- chase the election.
However, under the decisions of the Supreme Court, it was not improper for either party to offer to put up buildings or to furnish other benefits to the county as an inducement to in- fluence the action of the voters at the polls.
The vote by townships and precincts, for and against, was as follows:
Augusta, 1st, 110, 159; Augusta, 2nd, 82, 73; St. Mary's, 1st, 37, 190; St. Mary's, 2nd, 82, 120; Hancock, 14, 227; Fountain Green, 93, 167; La Harpe, 1st, 150, 44; La Harpe, 2nd, 261, 52; Chili, 148, 187; Harmony, 39, 231; Carthage, 1st, -, 387; Carthage, 2nd, -, 407; Pilot Grove, 63, 152; Durham, 80, 84; St. Albans, 130, 145 ; Bear Creek, 174, 66; Prairie, 64, 168; Rock Creek, 61, 211; Dallas City, 84, 184; Pontoosuc, 68, 90; Walker, 308, 2; Wythe, 203, 6; Monte- bello, 1st, 151, 48; Montebello, 2nd, 204, 86; Sonora, 219, 46 ; Appanoose, 131, 51; Rocky Run, 194, -; Wilcox, 126, - -; Warsaw, 1st, 295, -; Warsaw, 2nd, 279, -; Nauvoo, 302, 27. Total, for, 4,152 ; aganst, 3,610.
If it had not been for the constitutional pro- vision that three-fifths of the voters of the county shall vote for removal except where the attempt is to remove the county seat to a point nearer the center of the county, the re- sult would have been favorable to Warsaw, and the county seat would have been removed to that city. Warsaw would have been ruined by an invasion of Carthage lawyers.
It is not the purpose of this history to enter into a discussion of the questions involved in the contest, but simply to outline the facts, and to state that, under the constitution and the vote taken, the county seat remained at Carthage.
The feeling developed during the contest did not persist for any considerable period of time after the election. The result of the election
690
HISTORY OF HANCOCK COUNTY
was accepted in the good spirit in which Ameri- can citizens ordinarily acquiesce in the results of their elections.
THE "LOG-CABIN" COURTHOUSE OF.1833
In giving the places at which the County Commissioners' Court was held from the or- ganization of the county to the location of the county seat at Carthage, it has been stated that certain terms of that court in 1832 were held at the Montebello courthouse. If there had been a courthouse at Montebello in 1832, as the word courthouse is ordinarily understood, subsequent sessions of the County Commis- sioners' Court would probably have been held there, and not at other places. Doubtless the word courthouse as so used refers not to a public building owned by the county, but to the place in Montebello where the court was being held at that particular term.
After the county seat had been located at Carthage in 1833, the County Commissioners' Court proceeded to make arrangements for the erection of a courthouse at Carthage. On June 6, 1833, it was ordered that Thomas H. Owen be authorized to "let out and enter into con- tract" with some suitable person to erect a temporary courthouse in Carthage "agreeably to a plan agreed on," to be completed on or before the 25th day of August, 1833; and it was further ordered that the said agent put up written advertisements at Carthage, at Venus and at Fort Edwards for ten days, that written proposals would be received for ten days, and that the said agent be authorized to select (ac- cept) the most eligible proposal, and require the "undertaker" 'to give bond and security to the county commissioners in double the amount of the contract.
Though digressing somewhat, it is proper to state in this connection that Thomas H. Owen, the agent above mentioned, was a minister of the Gospel, who came in 1831 to the locality afterwards named Carthage, and to refer to the fact that the "written advertisements" above mentioned were to be put up at three places only, Carthage, Venus and Fort Edwards, which indicates strongly that these were the principal settlements or "business centers" of the county at that time.
The records of the County Commissioners' Court show that on Sept. 3, 1833, it was ordered
that Thomas H. Owen be authorized to receive the courthouse in Carthage of John M. Forrest when completed, and to draw an order on the treasurer for the amount, who was to be re- quired to pay the same out of any money in the county treasury unappropriated.
The June term of the County Commissioners' Court, 1833, was held at the house of Wesley Williams in Carthage, and the September term, 1833, was held at the courthouse in Carthage, the "temporary" courthouse having been erected between these two terms of the court.
The clapboard roof was put in place and an- chored with poles at a later date, and the neces- sity for a stove for this building, as yet roofless, spurred the County Commissioners' Court to ac- tion, and the followng order was passed on Sept. 3, 1833 :
"Ordered that George Y. Cutler be employed to procure a good 'ten' plate stove and sufficient pipes for the use of the courthouse in Carthage, and that he procure the same as soon as prac- ticable, and that he be allowed such sum from the county as the same may cost."
It is highly probable that the stove was pro- cured, although there is no record of the fact.
On Oct. 27, 1833, the County Commissioners' Court proceeded to "let out" the covering of the courthouse in Carthage and also to "ciel it underneath the joists," whereupon John A. Mckinney became the "undertaker" and entered into bond and security which was approved and filed.
On Dec. 3, 1833, John A, Mckinney was al- lowed by the court "$37.50 in full pay for cover- ing courthouse." The building of this court- house was such a stupendous undertaking, that the contract for the erection of the walls seems to have been awarded to John M. Forrest and the contract for the clapboard roof to John A. Mckinney.
It would be interesting to know the dimen- sions and cost of this log-cabin courthouse. Mr. . Gregg wrote that he could find no record of its cost or dimensions, but that its size was "prob- ably about" 16 by 24 feet.
Small orders were issued about this time to John M. Forrest, who was the contractor, or "undertaker," but there is no evidence that these were in payment for the courthouse. But the condition of the county treasury was not such as to license "profiteering." The report of George Y. Cutler, Treasurer of the County,
1
691
HISTORY OF HANCOCK COUNTY
for the year ending the first Monday of Decem- ber, 1833, showed total receipts of $1,017.3934, and total county orders redeemed of $849.3114. If the total county expenditures for the year were less than $850, the amount paid for the courthouse must have been comparatively insig- nificant. The fine forest which used to skirt Long Creek reached southward almost to the city limits and logs were to be had for the ask- ing. The logs which went into this building were unhewn. The erection of the courthouse was simply a question of labor, felling the trees, trimming, shaping and hauling them, and lifting them into their places, with such chink- ing as would prevent overworking the stove. Then floor, roof, benches, and a little furniture, were to be provided, and the work was done.
A picture of this temporary courthouse is given in this volume. This is taken from Gregg's history of the county, of which the picture forms the frontispiece. This is prob- ably a fairly accurate representation of the building. Mr. Gregg was a resident of Carthage in 1836. In June, 1836, he printed at Carthage the first newspaper ever issued in the county. It was called The Carthagenian, and was owned by a company of citizens, and enjoyed a pre- carious existence of less than a year. (So says Gregg himself.) The temporary court- house had been built about three years before, and was used for county purposes about two years after, the suspension of the publication of The Carthagenian. Mr. Gregg saw the build- ing perhaps daily while he was at Carthage, and his description of it is the best description available at this time and is doubtless substan- tially correct. Mr. Gregg says :
"The regular term of the board was held in the courthouse, Sept. 2, 1833. This courthouse was a log cabin situated south of the Square, about where the jail now stands. It was built of round, unhewed logs, with a clapboard roof, held on by poles ; had a puncheon floor and slab benches for seats. Its door was in the north side, and it was adorned with at least two glass windows. On the south side was a platform raised about a foot from the floor, on which was placed a splint-bottomed chair, as a seat for his honor, while administering the law. This 'courthouse' was also used, by permission of the authorities, for a school and for Sunday preaching, and for public meetings of different character. Most of the early ser-
mons, by ministers of the various denomina- tions, were preached in this building. Its clap- board roof was not the best protection against the weather; for in its 'latter days,' it is in the memory of a lady who in it taught some of the young Carthagenians 'how to shoot,' that in time of a hard shower, her pupils had to seek for dry places on the floor.
"In this building the County Commissioners' Court held sessions, and Judges Young, Lott and Ralston held their Circuit Courts from 1833 to 1839."
After the occupation of the new courthouse in 1839, the "temporary" courthouse was de- graded to other uses than the trial of causes and the administration of county affairs. Doubt- less, it was used at times for "select" schools, and possibly at times for business enterprises. There is one record which shows the renting of the building by the county, but not the purpose for which it was rented. This was on Feb. 2, 1844, and the order of the County Commis- sioners' Court is as follows :
"Ordered that the old courthouse be rented to David Baldwin from this day at thirty-seven cents per month until further action by this court."
David Baldwin, the lessee, was the grand- father of Mrs. Eudocia B. Marsh, extracts from whose articles in The Bellman will be found in this volume.
It is worth while to refer to the terms of the Circuit Court which were held immediately before and immediately after the completion of the 1833 courthouse.
On June 4, 1832, the Circuit Court was held "at the house lately occupied by Mason Bedell in Montebello"; on Oct. 15, 1832, the Circuit Court was held "at the courthouse in Monto- cello"; on June 3, 1833, the circuit court was held "at the courthouse in Carthage"; and on April 8, 1834, the circuit court was held "at the courthouse in Carthage."
There was no courthouse in Carthage on June 3, 1833, and there was probably none in Monte- bello on Oct. 15, 1832, but the use of the word courthouse in these instances was a fiction of law by which the place where court was held was regarded as a courthouse for that par- ticular term. It is on the same theory that, as Bryant says, the "groves were God's first temples."
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.