USA > Indiana > Hancock County > History of Hancock county, Indiana; its people, industries and institutions > Part 36
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
387
POLITICS.
Australian plan, but not strictly in accordance with any stitute. For this reason the court held that it lacked jurisdiction. The cases were not appealed to any higher tribunal. but were dismissed following this decision.
RELATIVE STRENGTH OF PARTIES.
The relative strength of the political parties in the county for twenty years prior to 1912 is shown by the following table, which gives the approxi- mate number of votes polled by each ticket at the elections indicated :
Year
Democratic
Republican
Prohibition
People's
1800
2,200
1.660
1802
2.230
1,860
72
205
1804
2.200
2.004
1896
2.700
2.240
1 20
1808
2.450
2,160
30
1900.
2.916
2.300
60
1902
2.500
2,060
1004
2,800
2.550
155
1900.
2.600
2.350
160
1908
2.932
2.440
115
1910.
2.542
2,170
SINCE 1912.
The schism that occurred in the national Republican convention at Chi- cago in 1912 was carried to the ranks of the party in Hancock county. Thomas 1. Morgan, treasurer of the Republican central committee, and John Rosser, secretary, both resigned and took their places in the alignment of the new Progressive party. Other members of the Republican county cen- tral committee resigned and threw their political fortunes with the new party. But these things were mere indications of the discontent that prevailed within the ranks of the Republican party itself. There was a general withdrawal from the party, and at the following election only a minority of the party was left to vote the Republican ticket. Progressive township organizations were effected on August 9. 1912. a Progressive county convention was held and a county organization effected. with Carl Rock, of Greenfield, as chair- man of the central committee. In the report of this county convention the following names were prominent : Carl Rock, Alvin Johnson, Gus Stuart James Furgason. James F. Reed. Sherman Rothermal. Irwin Barnard. James L. Vail. Capt. Henry Snow. Charles MeKensie. Robert Oktham. Joseph P. Reeves, John Henry Gates, Abram C. Pilkenton, 11. E. Leech.
388
HANCOCK COUNTY, INDIANA.
In the election that followed five tickets were in the field. The relative strength of the three strongest is indicated below :
Judge-Earl Sample, Democratic, 2,375 : Eldon Robb, Republican, 617: James F. Reed, Progressive, 1.508.
Representative-Robert F. Reeves, Democratic, 2.533 : George W. Gates, Republican, 698: Elwood Barnard, Progressive, 1.265.
Treasurer-Allen F. Cooper. Democratic. 2.568: Johni Hittle. Republi- can, 676: John H. Gates. Progressive, 1,176.
Sheriff-Mack Warrum, Democratic, 2.393: James W. Hiday, - Republi- can. 819: James L. Vail. Progressive, 1.290.
Coroner-Earl Gibbs. Democratic, 2.564; W. R. Johnson, Republican, 693: Ernest R. Sisson, Progressive, 1,265.
Surveyor-G. C. Winslow. Democratic, 2,651; Albert C. Atherton. Republican, 710.
Commissioner. Eastern District-J. H. Bussell, Democratic, 2.543; Franklin L. Bridges, Republican, 701 ; John W. Reeves. Progressive. 1.232.
Commissioner, Western District-George Allen, 2.549: John Souders. Republican, 709: Charles McKensie, Progressive. 1,228.
John F. Wiggins, the Socialist candidate for judge, received 184 votes.
In 1914, however, the ratio of votes had changed :
Democratic 2.350
Republican 1.200
Progressive 875
In the ranks of the Democracy of the county today are many men whose faces have been familiar in the party's councils, and whose judgments have directed the local policies of the party through many years and through many battles. We cannot mention all of them, but no picture of a general Dem- ocratie meeting of this day at the county seat would be complete without the faces of Elbert Tyner. John Hayes Duncan, Michael Quigley, George W. Ham, John E. Dye, William Elsbury, Isom Wright. August Dennis, Horace Wickard, John Manche, George Crider. Charles Barr, William H1. Thomp- son. Matthew L. Frank, William .\. Woods and others.
With these men who have labored through the years and who have borne the burden and the heat of the day, stand also the men of the middle age and the younger men, who are giving of their time and energy that its banner may not trail in the dust. AAmong the faces that are very familiar we see our Judge Earl Sample, John F. Eagan, John B. Hinchman, William .1.
389
POLITICS.
Service, Samuel J. Offutt, Edward W. Pratt, Jonas Walker, Charles L. Tin- dall. Robert L. Mason, Edwin T. Glascock, Charles Cook, Arthur Van Duyn, John .\. Anderson, Sherman Smith, Lemuel Moore, George Matlock. Thomas Hope, Charles Scott, Louis II. Merlau, William G. Lantz. John F. Shelby, F. MI. Sanford. Clint Caldwell, John Mooney, Quincy .A. Wright, and many others.
But no picture of any general or business meeting of the Democracy at the county seat within the last quarter of a century would be complete if it omitted from the foreground the likeness of the genial secretary-who is practically always called to the table-Elmer T. Swope.
Among those who have remained loyal to the Republican standard through the storm and stress of many campaigns are such men as William R. Hough, John C. Eastes and others of their age. Among the younger men are Edwin P. Thayer, who has been mentioned above: William .1. Hough, who has been favorably mentioned as a candidate for Congress : Newton R. Spencer, editor of the Greenfield Republican; Ora Myers. Dr. C. K. Bruner, Dr. L. B. Griffin, George W. Duncan, J. P. Black, W. R. Mckown, W. R. King, James McDaniels, Henry Nichols. R. F. Cook. George W. Gates, Eldon A. Robb, James W. Hiday, John Little, W. C. Atherton, William P. Bidgood. William F. Thomas, John S. Souder, James Garrett, William G. White, W. R. Johnston, Morgan Andrick, Charles Gately, I. A. May, John Corocoran, H. Ward Walker, Frank Cook, Morton Allender, Charles Vetters, A. H. Thomas, William T. Orr, Frank McCray, C. M. Eastes, W. E. Scotten, John E. Barrett, C. M. Jackson, Charles H. Kirkhoff, Ed C. Huntington, James H. Kimberlin, A. R. Ayres and others who have been active in different parts of the county.
Among those who revolted from the tyranny of party machinery that was thought to be crushing the individual under its weight : who preferred new standards and new ideals, and who led in the organization of the county under the leadership of Theodore Roosevelt, should be mentioned, James F. Reed. J. P. Reeves, Claude Woods, Walter Woods, II. H. Spangler. Edward Williams, Pearl Alexander, Elwood Barnard, Irvin Barnard, Sherman Roth- ermel, John Mugg, James Webb, G. E. Stuart. M. S. Walker, Thomas Dill- man. Walter Eastes, Frank Hanes, Dr. Lucian Ely, Grant Krammes, Ralph Logan. O. J. Coffin, James Lindamood, William Hawkins, Barclay Binford. Frank E. Rock, Thomas E. Niles. R. O. N. Oldham, A. C. Pilkenton. Carl S. Rock, Marvin Fletcher, Homer Smith. W. W. McCole, Thomas 1. Morgan, Alvin Johnson and H. T. Roberts.
340
HANCOCK COUNTY, INDIANA.
ONE TERM.
For a number of years past a sentiment has been developing in the county that men elected to a four-year term of office should not be reelected. Since the partial defeat of the Democratic ticket in 1886, but two men. Lawrence Boring and James Thomas, have held more than one term of an elective four- year office. No other candidates have even succeeded in getting a second nomination, although several efforts have been made.
THE TOWNSITIPS.
Viewing the county by townships. Blue River has always been strongly Republican. Since the enactment of the law creating the township trustee's office in 1859. Blue River has elected but two Democratic township trustees. James P. New, in 1863, and Harry L. Fletcher, in 1914. Jackson township has also been Republican, yet on several occasions Democratic township trus- tees have been elected. . All of the other townships have been counted in the Democratic column, although all of them, with the exception of Brandywine, have at different times elected Republican township trustees. Brandywine alone has had an unbroken line of Democratic township trustees since the law was enacted in 1859.
COUNTY CHAIRMEN.
It is impossible at this time to procure the names of the officers of the various political organizations prior to 1860. The following, however, is a list of the chairmen of the different political parties in the county since 1860. as far as it has been possible to make the same complete :
Democratic.
1860-J. A. Hall.
1878-Morgan Chandler.
1861-Benjamin F. Caldwell.
1880-Ephraim Marsh.
1866-John W. Ryon.
1882-Ephraim Marsh.
1867-Alfred Potts.
1884- Andrew Hagan.
1868-31. L. Paullus. 1868. - Jacob Slifer. 1870-William Frost.
1886 -Andrew Hagan.
1888 U. S. Jackson.
ISoc -- U. S. Jackson.
1870-Jacob Slifer.
1842-I. A. Curry.
1872 George Barnett. 1804-F. W. Felt.
187-George Barnett. 1800-George W. Iam.
1870-George Barnett.
ISOS-E. W. Felt.
39
POLITICS.
Igcc -- Charles J. Richman. 1902-George Crider.
1904-11. 1). Barrett.
1900-Lawrence Wood.
1908-Lawrence Wood.
1910-Richard Hagans. 1911-Clint Parker. 1012-William Service. 1914-Thomas Seaman. 1916 Rosecrans L. Ogg.
Republican.
1860-James P. Foley. 1861-James P. Foley. 1867-1. W. Gooding. 1868-Nelson Bradley. 1870-N. P. Howard. 1874-W. C. Burdett. 1876-W. C. Burdett. 18,8-Henry Snow. 1880-Henry Snow. 1882-Henry Snow. 1884 -- Henry Snow. 1880-Samuel A. Wray. 1888-R. A. Black. 1890-Dr. W. R. King.
1862-William Frost. 1864-N. P. Howard.
1860-George Barnett.
1872-John Roberts.
18-8-William Scars. 188c-William Sears.
1880-1. N. Hunt. 1888-R. M. Julian. 1800-R. M. Julian. 186,2-Benton L. Barrett. 1804-K. M. Julian.
1892-Dr. W. R. King. 1894-W. P. Bidgood. 1896-Newton R. Spencer. 1898-Elmer J. Binford. 1900-Newton R. Spencer. 1002-Edwin P. Thayer. 1902-Arthur Il. Thomas. 1004-Walter Bridges. 1006-W. H. H. Rock.
1908-W. H. H. Rock. .
1910-James F. Reed.
1916-Eldon Robb. 1912 -- Ora Myers. 1014-William F. Thomas.
Union. 1866-Pennel Bidgond.
National Union.
Liberal Republican.
National or Grecuback. 1882-William Sears.
Prohibition.
1800-R. M. Julian. 1808-1. 11. Hunt. 1000-1. 11. Ilunt. 1902-Benjamin J. Binford. 1964 -- Benjamin J. Binford.
392
IIANCOCK COUNTY, INDIANA.
1906-Benton L. Barrett. 1906-Benton L. Barrett. 1908-J. W. Harvey. 1910-J. W. Harvey.
1912-J. M. Pogue. 1912-Rev. J. S. Clawson. 1914-Rev. J. S. Clawson.
People's Party.
1892 -- Coleman Pope. 1894-Thomas H. Bentley.
1896-Samuel R. Walker. 1898-George Walker. Progressive.
1912-Carl Rock. 1914-Howard Roberts.
1912-John F. Wiggins.
1916-Howard Roberts.
Socialist.
CHAPTER IX.
TEMPERANCE.
The liquor traffic has always been a source of revenue to the county. In fact this has been the chief argument for maintaining the traffic from the fifth day of May, 1828, to the present.
The first meeting of the board of county commissioners of Hancock county was held on April 7. 1828, and the first liquor license was granted on May 5. 1828. In that early day the applicant for a license to sell liquor had to present to the board of commissioners a recommendation signed by twelve frecholders of the county. When this had been done, and the fee paid, the license was issued in a very simple form :
"On the application of James Parker for a license to retail spiritnous liquor and foreign groceries at his house in the county of Hancock, Indiana- by a recommendation of twelve of his fellow citizens of the same township ( frecholders) : therefore it is ordered by the Board that the said James Par- ker be licensed for and during the term of one year from this date, and that he now produces the receipt from under the hand of the Treasurer of said County of his having paid Five Dollars as a tax on said license."
Another entry was made in about the same form relative to the applica- tion of Joseph Chapman :
"On the application of Joseph Chapman for a license to retail spirituous and strong liquors, foreign and domestic groceries at his grocery in the town of Greenfield and in the County of Hancock, Indiana. Therefore it is ordered by the Board that the said Joseph Chapman be licensed as such for and dur- ing the term of one year from the date of said license-And the said Joseph Chapman here now produces a certificate from under the hands of twelve free holders of said township of Brandywine-and that he paid the sum of five dollars as a tax to the County Treasurer."
Liquor at that time was commonly sold in the groceries. It is interest- ing now to observe the distribution of groceries that were licensed previous to 1840. that also retailed liquor "by the small." Following is the list :
James Parker-1828. Greenfield. Joseph Chapman-1820. Greenfield. Amos Dickerson-1831. Sugar Creek.
393
394
HANCOCK COUNTY, INDIAN.A.
Morris Pierson --- 1831, Greenfield.
Barzilla Rozell-1837. Brown township.
Taylor Willett-1838, Charlottesville. Asa Gooding-1838. Greenfield.
Jacob Schramm-1838. Sugar Creek.
Peter F. Newland-1838. Charlottesville.
Lewis & Shifer-1838. Hancock county.
Joshua Stone-1838, Greenfield.
William Johnson-1838. Greenfield. John Delaney-1838, Sugar Creek.
John Dye-1839. Sugar Creek. Solomon Hull-1839, Hancock county.
Asa Cooper-1839. Hancock county.
Gavis Richardson-1839. Hancock county.
William Garrison-1839. Hancock county.
William Bentley-1839. Hancock county.
William Griffin-1839. Greenfield.
John Martin-1839, Hancock county.
Laymon & Graft-1840. Hancock county.
John Wilkinson-1840, Greenfield. Hart & Burk-1840. Greenfield.
Among the old papers in the clerk's office may still be found itemized claims filed against decedent's estates. Now and then a grocer's claim may be found showing the liquor items on the same bill with "foreign and domestic groceries." These claims are illuminating with reference to the customs of the times.
While the grocers were retailing liquors as indicated above. the taverns were also engaged in the same business. Of the twenty taverns licensed in this county before 1841. all but six retailed liquor "by the small." When the distribution of the taverns over the county is observed in connection with the distribution of the groceries that retailed liquor, and when it is remem- bered that whisky could be bought for ten cents per quart, one begins to appreciate the case with which it could le procured in those days.
Conditions as described above prevailed pretty generally in the county until within a decade of the Civil War. There is no record of the combined opposition of the people to the sale of intoxicating liquors during the early years Persons could be punished, of course, for selling liquor illegally, and the grand juries did frequently return indictments for such violations of the
395
TEMPERANCE.
law. In the report of the grand jury, made on February 17, 1849. for instance, ten indictments were returned against persons for "selling and giving liquor to a drunken man." Eight indictments were also returned against persons for "selling liquor without a license." Other indictments were returned at other times. It is interesting to observe, too, in a copy of the Greenfield Reveille, published in April, 1845. that a large part of one column was given to an argument against the liquor traffic. The article was prepared by G. N. Voss, an attorney of the local bar, and much of his argument was addressed to the "moderate drinker."
SONS OF TEMPERANCE.
In the early fifties the county was pretty thoroughly organized by a secret order known as the Sons of Temperance. The purpose of the order is explained in its name. Lodges were instituted in all parts of the county. and young men were solicited to sign the pledge. No records of the organ- ization remain in existence, but the older people tell us that a great deal of temperance enthusiasm was aroused by the order.
On March 5, 1859, however, an "Act relating to the sale of Spirituous. Vinous, and Malt Liquors" was approved, which required special notice of the intention to apply for a license to sell, etc. Provision was also made for remonstrating, and it may fairly be said that right here was the
BEGINNING OF THE TEMPERANCE FIGITTS.
At the June session of the board, in 1859. John Hudson made applica- tion for a license to retail liquor in the town of Walpole ( Fortville ), but the board refused to grant the application because of the insufficiency of his notice. Several other applicants had the same difficulty during the next year or two. At the September term, 1859. the applicant was successful. Licenses were also granted under the new law to Andrew Hagan at Wal- pole, and John Carmichael and Frederick Hammel at Greenfieldl.
Joseph Gustin, by his attorney, Thomas D. Walpole, also applied for a license at the September term, 1859. to retail liquor, whereupon Joseph B. Atkinson presented a remonstrance against granting said license, signed by himself and ninety-seven others. He also presented objections in writing, all of which were considered by the board who thereupon refused to grant the license. Gustin then by his attorney. David Vanlaningham, moved the board for a new hearing, but this motion the board overruled.
The remonstrance of Joseph B. Atkinson and others, mentioned above. was the first of a long series of remonstrances that have been filed before
396
HANCOCK COUNTY, INDIANA.
the board of commissioners under the different laws that have been enacted since that time. On September 3. 1860. Robert D. Cooper, by his attorney, David Vanlaningham. applied for a license to retail intoxicating liquors. On September 4. 1860. Reuben A. Riley presented a remonstrance signed by himself and ninety-nine others against the granting of a license to the applicant. The applicant moved the rejection of the remonstrance, which motion the board overruled. The application was withdrawn on September 5.
On September 6. 1860. W. W. Pierson applied for a retail liquor license. which the board refused, on the ground of the insufficiency of the descrip- tion of the premises in which the liquor was to be sold.
At the March session of the board, in 1861. John Carmichael again made application for a license to retail spiritnous liquor. Joseph B. AAtkison first moved the board to dismiss the application because of the insufficiency of the notice, but this motion was overruled by the board. He therefore filed a remonstrance signed by himself and one hundred and twenty-six others against the granting of such license to said applicant. The cause was set down for hearing. after which.
"The board being sufficiently advised in the premises, finds that said applicant is not of good character and is not fit to be intrusted with a license to retail spirituous liquor.
"It is therefore considered by the board that said application be denied. and that a license to retail spirituous liquor by said John Carmichael be refused.
"And thereupon said John Carmichael tendered fifty dollars and a hond, and demanded a license. all of which was rejected by the board.
"NEVILL REEVES. "ELINS MCCORD, "HIRAM TYNER. "Commissioners."
At the June term. in 1861. Jonathan Dunbar applied or a license. He introduced oral testimony in proof of the publication of his notice, and also as to the fitness to be intrusted with a license. Joseph B. AAtkison again came forward with a remonstrance signed by himself and one hundred and fifty-five others against granting a license to the applicant, whereupon Duin- bar withdrew his application.
When the remonstrance against Dunbar was filed, the Hancock Dem- ocrat published the list of names that appeared upon it. Some of the names
397
TEMPERANCE.
were omitted from the list, at which the signers were aggrieved. In explain- ing the matter a week later, the Democrat stated :
"It so happened that the remonstrance had been signed in parts and that not all parts had been collected and filed, and therefore were not published in the paper. This caused a complaint from citizens whose names did not appear, because they were eager to have their due portion of credit for hav- ing opposed the application. The people were represented before the board of commissioners by Joseph B. Atkison and William R. Hough."
It is not the intention to give a detailed statement of the contest that has arisen on every application that has been fiekl before the board of com- missioners for a license to sell spirituous and intoxicating liquors. The fore- going instances have been detailed merely to show the temper of the people and the earnestness with which they undertook a campaign for cleaner living and purer homes. It is interesting to observe in this connection the follow- ing editorial from the issue of the Hancock Democrat of March 27. 1861:
"GREENFIELD A TEMPERANCE TOWN.
"It is perhaps not generally known that this place is without a licensed grocery and has been for the last six months. Several efforts have been made in vain to obtain a license. The citizens seem to be determined to wipe away the stigma of reproach brought on our town by the whisky leaders who cared more for the base use and advantages acquired through its instrumentality than for the fame and good order of society. The public sentiment of the town is so well known that no man who respects the will of its citizens or regards his own character will be apt to offend the public by petitioning for a license to sel! spirituous liquors in Greenfield. Shoukl such an attempt hereafter be made the character and fitness of the applicant will be well ventilated if we can correctly judge public sentiment.
"Whilst we are on this subject, we can further say, that there is but one licensed grocery in Hancock county. Who can hereafter say that Han- cock is a whisky county ?"
The "one licensed grocery" referred to above was opeated by Andrew Hagan at Fortville. At least the record of the board of commissioners shows no other license at this time. Hagan, as stated above, was licensed at the September term, 1859, and annually thereafter until September, 1864. when a remonstrance was filed, and his application withdrawn.
That the zeal of the people did not abate at the close of these two years is indicated by the following tabulated statement, showing the names of the
398
HANCOCK COUNTY, INDIANA.
applicants, the dates of the application, and the disposition made of the applications by the board of county commissioners :
Andrew Hagan-September. 1862. Granted.
John Carmichael-September, 1862. Remonstrance and appeal.
Andrew Hagan-September. 1863. Granted.
Loring W. Gapen-March, 1864. Denied.
Andrew Hagan-September, 1864. Remonstrance: application with- drawn.
Loring W. Gapen-December. 1865. Remonstrance : application with- drawn.
William G. Ritchie-December, 1865. Remonstrance : granted.
Nicholas Klock-December, 1865. Remonstrance ; application with- drawn.
Robert 11. Offutt-March. 1866. Remonstrance : application dismissed. John Walsh-June. 1866. Remonstrance : application dismissed.
Jacob Stoehr-September, 1866. Granted; remonstrators appeal. Stephen .A. Jones-September, 1866. Granted; remonstrators appeal. Nicholas Klock-December. 1866. Remonstrance : appeal defeated. William G. Ritchie-June. 1866. Granted: remonstrators appeal.
John C. Rardin-December. 1866. Granted : remonstrators appeal.
When the application of AAndrew Hagan was withdrawn in 1864, the county was without a licensed saloon until in December, 1865. At that time a license was granted to William G. Richie at Greenfield. It is interesting to observe, too, that a few months after the county had been at least legally "dry." the following editorial was published with evident pride in the Hancock Democrat :
"TEMPERANCE FOR HANCOCK.
"Let all the world know that in this county there is not a licensed liquor shop, nor has there been such for months past. The whisky power in this county fought long and hard for political ascendancy under an able and unscrupulous leadership, but all in vain. The good people, irrespective of party, can now congratulate each other that the name of Hancock county is no longer to be identified in the public mind with drunkenness and intemperance."
After the withdrawal of his application, in 1865, Loring W. Garen did not apply for a liquor license until September. 1870. During these inter- vening years he must have been engaged in selling "soft drinks," and in view
399
TEMPERANCE.
of the comfort and satisfaction that so many people have derived from drink- ing sodas, the following item taken from the issue of the Hancock Democrat of July 4. 1867, is probably worthy of a place in the temperance chapter of the county's history :
"Soda Water .- L. W. Gapen. not satisfied with feasting the inner man with his cream, has procured a soda fount, after the latest cut, and is daily dispensing this delightful and healthy beverage to delighted crowds. Our 'devil' says it is the most elevating effervescent he has yet become acquainted with in his peregrinations."
Joseph B. Atkison or Reuben A. Riley usually represented the remon- strators in the legal battles before the board of commissioners in the cam- paigns that were waged during the years indicated above. William R. Ilough frequently appeared for them, also.
Beginning with March, 1868, there was a cessation in the remonstrance activity which continued for almost two years. The Good Templar made their appearance and a number of lodges were organized in the county. Men and women joined the order and signed the pledge to abstain from the use of intoxicating liquor. Remonstrances were filed against the applications of Nicholas Klock, of New Palestine, in June and September, respectively. 1868. From March, 1868, until September. 1869, twelve applications were granted without opposition. In September and December, 1860. remon- strances were filed against three applications, but with these exceptions, no objection was offered until March, 1872. In the meantime the liquor traffic flourished. During 1871 and up to and including March, 1872, ten licenses were granted. Six more were granted during the remaining months of 1872. But a wave of opposition was sweeping over the county, and beginning with the March term, 1872, remonstrances were filed and eight applications were denied.
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.