USA > Kansas > Brown County > History and statistics of Brown County, Kansas, from its earliest settlement to the present time, embracing incidents and hardships of pioneer life, the rise and progress made in twenty-two years, location, resources, fertility of its soil, etc., etc. > Part 6
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
F. M. Keith 231
Probate Judge
D. K. Babbit 732
Supt. of Pub. Inst.
R. C. Chase 755
Vote for Nov. 7, 1871 .. Whole number of votes cast 1109
Name of Office County Commissioner
.6
M. B. Bowers 635
A. M. Hough 748
H. S. Lytle 323
T. Schecker 374
..
66
Wn. Hewitt 353
County Treasurer
A. Mclaughlin 794
A. Schilling 261
County Clerk
..
E. Bierer 276
Sheriff
B. F. McCoy 657
G. B. Jones 372
Registrar of Deeds
A. R. Platt 554
3. A Pope
441
County Surveyor
S. E. Erwin 748
C. B. Ellis 307
S. Wilkinson 756
. Smouse 287
Vote for Nov. 5, 1872. Whole number of votes cast 1525 Name of Office Name of Candidate No. of votes Clerk of Dist. Court Henry Anderson 1114 66 66
J. F. Roehin 400
Ira J. Laeoek 1075
Henry A. Parsons 387
Probate Judge
D. K. Babbit 1105
G. Amann 383
County Commissioner
H. F. Macy 1124
66 66
Adam Schilling 384
Supt. of Pub. Inst.
R. C. Chase 1125
O. Fountain 348
Vote for Nov. 4, 1873.
Name of Office. County Treasurer
Whole number of votes cast 1406 Name of Candidate. No. of votes
Harvey Seburn 953
H. F. Macy 438
Coroner
County Attorney
66
٠٠
66 66
Name of Candidate No. of votes
B. F. Partch 652
E. N. Morrill 766
69
BROWN COUNTY.
Name of Office
Name of Candidate No. of votes
County Clerk 66
Henry Isely 847
Jacob Reasoner 548
Registrar of Deeds
66
A. R. Platt 508
Sheriff
Albert Rokes 716
B. F. McCoy 480
C. H. Orth 194
S. E. Erwin 877
L. P. Hazen
518
H. Honnell
888
J. M. Castle
503
C. A. Saylor 286
L. P. Winslow 135
A. Walters 275
O. Fountain 220
Jno. McCrerey 315
C. L. Carroll 146
Whole number of votes cast 1373
Name of Candidate No. of votes
J. W. Oberholtzer 782
David L. Burger 571
F. M. Keith 736
Jas. Falloon 609
R. C. Chase 779
Supt of Pub. Inst.
66
D. C. Nutting 566
T. B. Dickason 760
N. P. Rawlings 594
Whole number of votes cast 1482
Name of Candidate No. of votes
James B. Allison 675
Harvey Seburn 796
Jacob Reasoner 630
Henry I sely 839
E. D. Benner 733
Jacob F. Roehm 699
C. H. Lawrence 700
Albert Rokes 523
P. C. McGilvary 231
66
2d
.€ 66
66 3d
6 .
Vote for Nov. 3, 1874. Name of Office
Clerk of Dist. Court 6 6
County Attorney
Probate Judge
Vote for Nov. 2, 1875.
Name of Office
County Treasurer
66
County Clerk
Registrar of Deeds 66
Sheriff
.6
F D. Howlette 880
County Surveyor ..
Coroner
Co. Commis'r 1st Dist.
20
HISTORY OF
Name of Office
Name of Candidate
No. of votes
Sheriff
A. J. Comstoek
2
County Surveyor
H. P. Kinney
829
J. O. Shannon 597
Coroner
Wm. Shirley
888
.:
W. A. Turner
528
County Commis'r 1st Dist.
C. F. Bowron
230
S. Sherman
183
..
..
66
R. McCartney 38
C. L. Carroll
313
66
.. 65
Theo. Schecker
164
..
..
20 -
Alfred Walters 463
..
COUNTY LINES.
The Legislature of 1868 changed the county lines by transferring townships five, ranges fifteen and sixteen from Brown to Jackson county. This is the only ehange that has ever been made in the boundaries, and leaves the county just twenty-four miles square.
BROWN COUNTY.
RISE AND FALL OF THE HIAWATHA CLUB.
COMPILED FOR THE AUTHOR BY A. R. MAY, ESQ. , CITY ATTORNEY.
During the year 1875 the City Council refused to grant any dram shop or saloon licenses in the city, and no intoxicating liquors were sold excepting such as may have been sold in the drug stores, until about October 7th, 1875, when there was a movement originated by a few persons, ostensibly for the purpose of forming a Beer Club for the purpose of social enjoy- ment, but in reality for the purpose of opening and maintaining a dram shop in violation of law, and evading the license laws of the city.
A petition was circulated and numerously signed, bearing the following heading :
"We, the undersigned, hereby agree, to and with "each other, to form and arrange a club for the pur- "pose of social enjoyment, said club to have its rooms "in the city of Hiawatha, and to be known as 'The "Hiawatha Club.' Dated this 7th day of Oct., 1875."
HISTORY OF
About the same time, and probably on the same day, Fred W. Rohl and Henry Stauff, two persons then living about eight miles south of town, opened the build- ing situated on the east half of lot No. 91, on Oregon St., commonly called the Billiard Hall or Corn Exchange, and owned by J. W.Pottenger,as the headquarters of the Hiawa- tha Club. They immediately and almost daily shipped large quantities of beer and liquors to said room, and the same was handed out to their customers, by said Rohl and Stauff, and drank on the premises, the customers paying there- for with printed tickets or checks, bought from Rohl and Stauff at five cents per ticket or check, one ticket pro- curing a glass of beer and two a drink of whisky, the more fancy drinks requiring more in proportion. After- wards, at a mecting held by the club, on October 13th, 1875, the club adopted a constitution and rules of order for their government, which among other things provided that thic officers of the association should consist of a Prsident, Vice President, Secretary, Treasurer and five Trustees, who together should form the Board of Manage- ment, to manage the affairs of the association. That the officers should be elected annually. That stated mectings should be held monthly. That members should be pro- posed one week before election, elected by ballot, receiv- ing not less than ten affirmative to each negative vote, and after clection each member should pay an entrance fee of 25 cents. The constitution also provided that each member must procure tickets from the treasurer for re- freshments before the same were partaken of.
In order to do away with the necessity of being for-
73
BROWN COUNTY.
mally proposed and ballotted for as a member, however, the constitution wisely and sagaciously provided " that any member might invite gentlemen to the rooms of the association for a single "day on, registering his own name with that of the visitor in a book kept for that pur- pose, thus securing to the tired and weary wayfarer a convenient oasis of refreshment.
The house committee was charged with the dnty of appointing the employees and regulating the price of articles furnished to members in the house, and while Messrs. Rohl and Stauff at their trial testified that they were appointed by the house committee to fill their respective stations, yet they had reluctantly to admit that they neglected to fix any compensation for their services, which to the mind of the Court did not seem to be very consistent with their defense, that they were not the proprietors of the establishment and running it for their own benefit and private gain, but simply as the paid employees of a lawful organi- zation.
Other rules were adopted as standing rules, one of which was, that the house should be open at 9 o'clock in the morning DAILY for the reception of members, and close at 12 o'clock in the evening, but the rule was not to influence members then actually in the house in respect to their departure.
This state of affairs lasted until the 15th of October, when H. J. Aten, Mayor of the City, issued his
7.1
IHISTORY OF
written order to G. T. Woodmansce, the City Mar- shal, commanding him to take charge of and close up said building, as a place dangerous to the peace and quiet of the city, and to keep the same closed until Saturday night, October 16th, at 12 o'clock, P. M., which order the Marshal promptly executed.
F
Early the following Monday morning Roll and Stauff opened the building again and prosc- ented their business of selling beer and liquor as they had done before, and continued to do so
until October 20th, when Mayor Aten issued a second order to the City Marshal commanding him to close the building, and keep it closed for the space of three days from that date, which order the Marshal immediately attempted to execute, but was forcibly cjected from the premises by Rohl and Stauff and several other members of the club.
He made one or two more attempts afterwards to execute the same, but finding the door locked and guarded every time that he made the attempt, he summoned as a posse, Thomas MeLaughlin, J. K. Klinefelter and G. E. Selleg.
They proceeded to the room, broke open the door,
75
BROWN COUNTY.
forcibly ejected the oceupants and locked the building up.
Shortly thereafter, Rolil and Stauff, and others, broke open the building, entered the same, and prosecuted their business the same as before.
Immediately after their expulsion from the building Fred W. Rohl made affidavit before W. J. Richardson, J. P., and proeured a warrant for the arrest of G. T. Woodmansee and his said posse on a charge of riot.
The ease was prosecuted before W. J. Richardson, J. P., by James Falloon and County Attorney, F. M. Keith, for the State, and the prisoners were defended by the City Attorney, A. R. May, Ira J. Laeoek and C. E. Berry. The jury promptly brought in a verdiet of not guilty and found that the prosecution was without eause. . The Justice thereupon discharged the prisoners, and taxed the costs of prosecution to the prosecuting witness, F. W. Rohl.
By this time matters had assumed quite a serious aspect : the club members declaring that the eity had no right to interfere in their business, and that they would resist any further attempt at interference even to the shedding of blood, and stating that they were advised by their counsel to do so. The city
76
HISTORY OF
authorities, on the other hand, were determined that the ordinances of the city should be enforced at all hazards and at any cost.
On "Nov. 18th Rohl and Stauff were arrested for
a violation of the city ordinances in selling in- toxieating liquors in said building, and the case was tried before Police Justice J. P. Mulbollen, on Nov. 22, and resulted in the conviction of the defendants, and in the imposition of a fine of $50 each on the defendants. From this judgement the defendants appealed to the District Court.
Roll and Stauff, however, still continued their business, and became even more bold and defiant, stating that no matter how often they would be con- victed they would appeal their cases and sell liquor all the same.
By this time, also, the place became an intolerable nuisance by reason of the boisterous and indecent behavior of the drunken people, day and night, in and around the building, the same being on the most public street and in the business portion of the city.
On November 27th, Rohl and Stauff were again ar- rested the charge of keeping and maintaining a eommon publie nuisance in
BROWN COUNTY.
said building, and on trial before the Police Judge Dec. 2d. Ewere convicted of keeping a nuisance and the premises adjudged a nuisance and ordered to be abated, and defendants ordered to pay the costs. From this judgment the ' defendants also promptly ap- pealed, and kept on selling liquor in the building as they had previously donc.
Thereupon, on or about the 15th day of Dec., 1875, the Mayor issued his writ to the City Marshal, (as the ordinance provided,) reciting the aforesaid judgment and ordering him to abate said nuisance.
After several ineffectual attempts by the Marshal to enforce said writ, being met by Rohl and Stauff with drawn revolvers and threats that they would shoot him if he attempted to carry the order into effect, he sumnioned to his aid a large posse of citizens, among whom were S. P. Gaskill, A. A. Holmes, R. C. Clase, George D. Blair, W. S. Bristol, J. C. Thomas, A. McLaughlin, and others, who, besides some volunteers numbering in all about twenty men, early on the morning of Dec. 25th, 1875, repaired to the saloon armed with revolvers, shot guns and sabres, forcibly ejected Henry Stauff, Rohl retreating in some disorder, emptied all the liquors found in the establishment, captur- ed tlic books and papers of the club, and with the billiard tables and furniture barricaded the doors. They then stationed guards on the outside and inside of the building, all heavily armed, and kept it guarded until some ten or twelve days thereafter
is
HISTORY OF
when the question of the occupancy of the building was settled by injunction proceedings in the District Court. Immediately after the building was occupied by the Marshal and his posse, Rohl and Stauff sent word into the country of the fact to numerous members of the club, who, to the number of several hundred, flocked to town, some being armed, breathing vengeance against the authorities and threatening to make an attack on the Marshal and his force and re-take the building.
Throughout the entire day and the greater portion of the night hundreds of the members of the club and their sympathizers congregated in the vicinity of the building, blaspheming and threatening to break into the building by force, and the citizens generally believed that an attempt of that kind would be made, but no actual attempt was made.
While thesc misguided rioters showed by their acts and deeds the intensity of their feelings at the invasion of their cherished rights,-the right to sell, buy and drink intoxicating liquors without regard to the laws of the land,-yet they quailed before the de- termined countenances of the men who guarded the building, and beyond venting their feelings in lan- guage, nothing further was done.
Matters remained thus for several days, when Rohl and Stauff served a notice on the city that they would apply for an injunction before Judge Hubbard, at Atchison. The city immediately served notice 0 1
79
BROWN COUNTY.
Rohl and Stauff that it would at the same time and place apply for an injunction on its part against them, filed its cross petition, and on Dec. 31st, 1875, obtained a tempo- rary injunction against Rohl and Stauff, conditioned that on filing a bond in the sum of $200, Rohl and Stauff should be restrained from interfering with the premises in any manner whatever, for the space of five days, when the court would hear the matter further at Troy.
Rohl and Stauff never filed their petition and did not appear at Atchison. The city gave the required bond, and at the time fixed, appeared at Troy. This time Rohl and Stanff appeared, but instead of asking f. : the injunction on their part, sought to prevent the city from obtaining one against them, on the grounds that they never filed their petition for an injunction, and that the city could not maintain its application on a cross petition to their petition which was not filed, and not pressed ; and also, because the title of the city's petition should be changed so as to make it plaintiff instead of defendant.
Judge Hubbard overruled these several objections and held that the service of notice on the city by Rohl and Stauff of their intention to apply for an injunction against the city, gave it the right to prevent in the man- ner it did : and the case was then fully presented on both sides, numerous affidavits being presented. After a full hearing Judge Hubbard, on Jan. 6th, 1876, granted an injunction, in favor of the city, restraining Rohl and Stauff from using the premises for the sale of or keeping of liquors of any kind therein, until the April term of our court, on condition that the city file a bond of $1000 which they immediately did ; also an order, that upon the filing by Rohl and Stauff of a bond in the sum of $200, the city should turn over the building and books, papers, &c., cap- tured in the same on the memorable 25th of Dec. Rohl and Stauff never filed their bond, but the city immediately
550 DISCARDED
HISTORY OF
turned over to J. W. Pottenger, who demanded the pos- session of the building, the same, and after obtaining copies of all the captured books, papers, &c., turned the same over to Roll and Stauff.
Thus ended the Hiawatha Beer Club, they never after- wards establishing any other place of business in this city for the sale of liquor. Rohl and Stauff, however, as indi- viduals, applied to the courts, and on Eeb. 10th, 1876, cach of them filed suits, individually, against H. J. Aten, G. T. Woodmansee, W. S. Bristol, S. R. Gaskill, R. C. Chase, A. A. Holmes, Wn. Clement and J. C. Thomas, for damages done to their persons and feelings, Rohl claim- ing $5000 damages, and Stauff a like amount, and also claiming $100 additional for cigars which he alleged the defendents destroyed. Both these petitions were demurred and the demurrers sustained ; but leave was granted by the court to file amended petitions. Before this time, Dec. 13th, 1875, Henry Stauff brought suit in the District Court against G. T. Woodmansee for $500 damages for ejecting him from the building. On Dec. 25th, 1875, Henry Stauff and Murry Stanley were arrested on a state warrant charged with threatening to commit a breach of the peace on R. C. Chase. There was no appearance made against the parties. On the same day S. P. Gaskill, W. S. Bristol, A. A. Holmes, J. C. Thomas, A. MeLaughlin, B. F. Parteh, G. T. Woodmansee. Geo. M. Blair, Wm. Clement, J. K. Klinefelter. R. Chase, A. G. Speer, Thurston Chase, L. S. Herbert, A. Rokes and Rev. C. L. Shackelford were ar- rested on oath of Henry Stauff, charged with committing an assault and battery, &e., on said Stauff, which case was heard before G. W. Seaman. J. P., and the information quashed. Both these last prosecutions arose out of the Beer Club business.
Shortly after the adjournment of the April term of court, 1876. Rohl and Stauff gave themselves up voluntarily to the Sheriff, stating that they could not pay their fines and that he would have to take charge of them. He kept them in the city calaboose, which was broken into by their friends one
$1
BROWN COUNTY.
night, and the prisoners liberated ; but it was re- paired and they were put back After staying in the cala- boose forseveral days, Reverends Shackelford and Lig- gett interested themselves in their behalf, visited them in their cell, and the result was that the mayor and city coun- cil were petitioned hy Rohl and Stauff to remit their fincs and discharge them, they, Rohl and Stauff, to pay all costs and dismiss all suits by them against the citizens, and the city to dismiss all proceedings against them. This was donc, and the money for paying the costs mostly raised by subscription, the larger part being contributed by the tem- perance people.
CONCLUSION.
In conclusion we desire to compare briefly the Brown county of to-day with the Brown county of 1855. The first tax collected in the county was for the year 1856, and the total tax for that year amounted to $52. The taxes of 1875 amounted to $83,144. The first assessment roll of the county now in existence is that of 1857, which shows a taxable property in the county of 38,078, of which $1400 was for four slaves. The assessment roll of 1876 shows a taxable property of 83,162,690. In 1855 the first farms were opened and the first crops planted. Until that time no plow had ever disturbed the virgin soil. In 1876 175.040 acres were under cultivation, an increase of 26,000 acres over 1875. In 1875, after thousands of acres of crops had been destroyed by grasshoppers, there . were raised in the county 200,000 bushels of small grain, 2,750,000 bushels of corn, 1,000,000 lbs of broom corn, 50,000 bushels of potatoes, and smaller quantities of sweet potatoes, flax, sorghum and millet. The total products of the county for that year being valued at $1,162,820. The crop of 1876 will be much larger and the money value will be considerably more. In 1857 there were 125 head of horses and 684 head of cattle. In 1876 there were 6194 head of horses and 17,184 head of cattle. In 1857 there
were no animals to sell for slaughter and very few slaughtered for home consumption .
HISTORY OF
In 1875 the value of animals slaughtered and sold for slaughter was 8200,000. In 1857 the first fruit trees were planted in the county. To-day there are 115,645 apple trees growing, of which 18,794 are bearing fruit. There are 1371 pear trees, 155,26 peach trees, and 19,080 cherry trees, now, in good condition. This would make an average of 32 fruit trees to each man, woman and child in the county. This does not include the trees in nurseries covering 377 acres and numbering millions. In addition to this there are 25 acres of vineyards in. the county and an immense quantity of the smaller fruits. Who can esti- mate the quantity of fruit that will be produced in the county in 1886 ? The sales of butter and eggs for 1875 were nearly $40,000. In 1854 the first white man settled in the county ; to-day there is a population of 9000. There were no schools and no churches ; to-day there are seventy- five sehools taught in the county at an expense of $30,000 per annum, and twenty church organizations are actively engaged in edueating the people up to a higher life.
The future promises to be a bright one for our county. With a soil and climate unsurpassed in the United States ; with an enterprising, honest, industrious and temperate class of settlers, the future prosperity of the county is as- sured. In only one respeet is Brown county unlike the other eounties of the state. It has NO WHISKY SALOON and NO JAIL ! It will never need the former ; may it never have any use for the latter.
THE END.
٠
2877
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.