USA > Kansas > Cherokee County > History of Cherokee County, Kansas and representative citizens > Part 7
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
The motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial must be overruled.
On the back page of the pamphlet Mr. Wil- son quotes a charge which Judge Krekel, of the United States Circuit Court of the Western District of Missouri, gave a grand jury, at Jefferson City, on the subject of repudiation. The charge is quoted, no doubt, in the hope that the people of Cherokee County who might read his pamphlet would be indirectly warned against any further attempt at obstructing the processes of the court. The charge of Judge Krekel is here given :
UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT, WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI.
INSTRUCTIONS TO THE GRAND JURY.
Resistance or interference with the execution of the laws of the United States, in many instances, takes the shape of interfering with the processes of the courts ; and as offenses of the kind come within your jurisdic-
tion, it will be your duty to examine and pass upon these cases that may come before you.
In order to commit an offense of the class referred to it is not necessary that the offender should present a gun, a pistol, or by any other direct means put the officer intrusted with the execution of the law or pro- cess of court into terror, but it may be done by indirect means, such as assembling in large numbers, acting and cooperating and by means of threats, or otherwise to overawe the officer and interfere with the discharge of his duty.
Thus a large number of persons may assemble and, by means of combinations and agreements not to bid for property offered for sale, and by threatening those who come for the purpose of bidding, with bodily harm, cause them not to bid. All such means the law de- nounces as interfering with its execution, and not to speak of the possible individual liability to those thus damaged. The law will not permit the judg- ments of its courts to be defeated by such means.
To tolerate such interference, without punishment, would be aiding in bringing about a demoralization which, while today may demonstrate its power for evil in resisting processes of the court, will to-morrow re- sist the government in its proper functions, not to speak of the utter disregard implied as to individual rights. The highest duty of the citizen, and his greatest interest, is that the law be obeyed and its violators punished, for on this he must ultimately depend for the protection of his person and property.
Jeremiah Luckey, of Salamanca township, has recently sent me a number of old papers relating to early affairs in Cherokee county. Among these is a "Notice to Settlers on the 'Joy Purchase' of the Cherokee Neutral Lands." I here give it in full :
CHEROKEE NEUTRAL LAND OFFFICE.
GENERAL AGENCY.
FORT SCOTT, KANSAS, December 18, 1868.
Notice is hereby given that all persons who have made settlement and continued to reside on the Chero- kee Neutral Lands, between the IIth day of August, 1866, and the roth of June, 1868, will be permitted to make entry at this office, of the lands occupied by them June 10, 1868, and at the date of entry ; that the same may be held secure from sale to other purchasers.
-
5€
HISTORY OF CHEROKEE COUNTY
In order to prevent delay or detention of the set- tlers at this office, in making entry of their lands, we have arranged to receive proofs, by townships, com- mencing with those nearest this office, during certain days herein specified ; and all persons failing to make such entry, before or during the time herein named, re- spectively, will he understood as waiving all privilege to purchase at the proposed rates of Mr. Joy, unless it shall be shown, by satisfactory proof, that such delay was unavoidable. Only one witness is necessary, in ad- dition to claimant's affidavit, to establish a claim for entry, such witness knowing that claimant resided upon the tract claimed, prior to June 10, 1868, of his contin- ued residence thereon.
In case of transfer, the evidence must show that the purchaser has been an occupant since his purchase from such recognized claimant. As soon as the entries are closed the lands will be valued, and by the first of March, next, a schedule of prices prepared, so that con- tracts may be made with settlers after that date. No contracts will be made prior to that date, except upon such lands as are known to be occupied, or where the settler has waived his right, and then only under spe- cial instructions.
That portion known as "The Eight Mile Strip," being six miles off the south end of Bourbon County and two miles off the north end of Crawford County, towit: Townships 26 and 27, Ranges 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25, will be entered during December 21, 22, 23, 24 and 26, 1868. Township 28, Ranges 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25, will be entered before or during December 28, 29 and 30, 1868, and January 4, 5, 6 and 7, 1869. Town- ship 29, Ranges 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25, will be entered during or before January 8, 9, 11, 12, 13 and 14, 1869. Township 30, Ranges 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25, will be en- tered during or before January 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23, 1869. Township 31, Ranges 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25, will be entered during or before January 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1869. Township 32, Ranges 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25, will be entered during or before February 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, 1869. Township 33, Ranges 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25, will be entered during or before Febru- ary 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13, 1869. Township 34, Ranges 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25, will be entered February 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20, 1869. Township 35, Ranges 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25, will be entered February 22, 23, 24, 25 26 and 27, 1869.
Settlers must be prepared with the numbers of
their lands, that there may be no unnecessary delay in preparing their proof.
JOHN T. Cox, General Agent.
Among the papers sent me by Mr. Luckey is a circtilar addressed, "To the Voters of Chero- kee County," and signed by "Many Voters." It is dated January 31, 1869, and it relates to the election then to be held February 16, 1869, for the purpose of ascertaining whether the people wanted the county seat to remain at Baxter Springs or to be moved to Columbus. I have elsewhere given an account of that election. The following is the circular, in full :
COUNTY SEAT CIRCULAR.
To the Voters of Cherokee County :
At the regular session of the Board of County Commissioners, held in Junuary, last, a special elec- tion was ordered to be held on the 16th day of Feb- ruary, 1869, to vote upon the question of removal and permanent location of the county seat.
Under the law providing for the same, 603 peti- tioners, legal electors, were necessary in order for the board to call an election. The number of petitioners presented was 862. The petition of one township, signed by forty voters, did not get in, making the en- tire number of electors calling for the election over 900. The total number of votes cast in the county, at the presidential election in November, last, was 1.349, showing that a majority of 447 voters in the county are not satisfied with the county seat heing located, as it is at present, on the extreme border of the county, or rather out of it. Notwithstanding the large majority in favor of a central location, a desperate effort is being madeby the people of Baxter Springs again to tliwart the will of the people. The most unblushing falsehoods are being circulated, hoping to divide the people and cause them to vote for different points. Lies that ought to hlister the tongue of any person uttering them are unblushingly told. For instance, that the people of the west side of the county are "pulling the wool over the eyes of the people on the east side;" that they are going to work for Millersburg instead of Columbus.
59
AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS.
The people of the west side emphatically brand the assertion as basely false. They have never asked for Millersburg to be a point and shall not vote for it. Their vote, as at the last election, will be a unit for Columbus. They waive all selfish and personal pref- erence, and they ask the people of the eastern, north- ern and southern and all other parts of the county, to join with them and, with an eye single to the pros- perity and well being of the county, vote for Columbus. It being the geographical center of the county, justice, economy and expediency demand it. The prosperity of the whole county is our prosperity. The county seat rightfully belongs to the whole people of the county, and not to a few; and it is the right of every tax payer to demand that its location be central.
It is urged by the people of Baxter Springs that the question ought not to be brought again so soon ; that it is a big expense to the county, and all that sort of thing. Does it not come with poor grace for them to cry "quits," after having so shamefully and rascally stolen the county seat, as it were. No man denies that Baxter Springs stuffed the ballot box, to the number of 4,000 votes, last May, when the question of moving the county seat was up. They do not deny it themselves. They admit it; and they plead, in justification, that other parts of the county did so; and. in order to be even, they did the same. But let us examine a little farther, in regard to the expense to the county, in the proposed change in the location of the county seat. The greatest item of expense in the county, amounting to many hundreds of dollars, is in having to send our prisoners away for safe keeping, as we have no jail of our own. The amount we paid last year, for this item, would build us a jail that would answer, for the present. A seemingly natural answer would be, "Why don't you build one?" There is where the trouble lics. The people are not willing to be taxed to build one, or any other county building, in a place that is not, and never can be made, the permanent location of our county seat. Its location where it now is, is a mere question of time; and a very short time, at that. If it is not voted away, the probabilities are that we shall have to go into another state before long, for our county scat. It is already reported and believed that the treaty now pending for the Indian Territory south of us, out of which a new state is to be formed, will throw Baxter Springs out of Kansas. Such a result is not at all improbable. The very fact that no provision is being made for the sale of the government strip in- dicates that it is in the new state. *
One thing more the county should know : The offices of the county clerk, county treasurer and regis-
ter of deeds are all in the barroom of a restaurant, the only room that could be had. Oh, shame, where is thy blush! All this, remember, is in a city of the second class. May the good Lord have pity on cities not of the second class!
In view of all the facts, we earnestly appeal to the voters throughout the county once more to stand up and demand their rights. The right to have the county seat at the center of the county is your right. See that you reclaim it at this election. Turn out and let us vote a unit for the county seat at Columbus. If we turn out our full strength, this vexatious question will be settled for all time to come. Just so long as the county seat is claimed and held at the edge of the county, just so long will we be harrassed with special elections. Strife, animosity, ill will are sure to exist.
Remember the day, the 16th of February, and the style of the ticket, "For County Seat, Columbus."
MANY VOTERS.
The undersigned proprietors of the claims upon which is laid the town site of Columbus, do propose to donate to the county, in the event of the county seat being located at Columbus, all lots necessary for county buildings, grounds for seminary, cemetery and fair grounds, said lots and sites to be selected by the Board of County Commissioners; also immediately to furnish a building that will answer for county offices, free of expense until such time as buildings can be put up.
J. N. LEE, F. FRY, H. SCOVELL, DR. J. HI. WALKER.
NOTE .- Elsewhere, in giving an account of the election concerning which the foregoing circular was put out, it is shown that there was a lot of ballot-box stuffing done in favor of Columbus. I have given this circular, for the purpose of showing how high the feel- ing was concerning the location of the county seat. I am glad it can truthfully be said that the relations be- tween Columbus and Baxter Springs, while not alto- gether as amicable as they will yet become, have so much improved that the old troubles have almost been forgotten .- Editor.
NOTE .- Since writing the foregoing chapter I have received a copy of "Dodge's Sectional Map of the Cherokee Neutral Lands," which L. Conklin, of Pleas- ant View township, kindly sent the publishing com- pany. The map is much worn, and it can not be repro- duced. I desire to assure Mr. Conklin that his kindness is appreciated .- Editor.
CHAPTER V.
COUNTY ORGANIZATION, POLITICAL HISTORY AND POPULATION STATISTICS.
THE ORGANIZATION OF CHEROKEE COUNTY-THE "COUNTY SEAT WAR"-LIST OF COUNTY OFFICERS-THE POLITICAL PHASES-MEMORABLE POLITICAL RALLIES-THE INCREASE OF POPULATION, AND IMMIGRATION FROM OTHER STATES.
THE ORGANIZATION OF CHEROKEE COUNTY,
Or the measures which were put in force for the purpose of organizing it, began in the sum- mer of 1866, shortly after the Cherokee In- dians had transferred the Cherokee Neutral Lands to the United States, as noted in a for- mer chapter. This was before the exact boun- dary of the county had been determined. The people were pressing so intently into this coun- try, that something had to be done toward ef- fecting an organization. In 1862 the Legisla- ture had passed an act providing for the organ- ization of new counties, where the conditions were up to the requirements; but, on account of the trouble between the settlers of Cherokee County and James F. Joy, pertaining to land titles, the organization of the county had been delayed.
August 3, 1866, Samuel J. Crawford, Gov- ernor of the State, appointed and commissioned A. V. Peters, Reese Cadwalader and J. W. Wal- lace, special county commissioners for Chero- kee County, and Julius C. Petit, special county
clerk. Julius C. Petit was sworn in by J. S. Emmons, county clerk of Bourbon County, September 6, 1866, and he that day appointed Daniel C. Finn as his deputy, who was the same day sworn in by Julius C. Petit. A. V. Peters, Reese Cadwalader and J. W. Wallace were sworn in by D. C. Finn, deputy county clerk, September 8, 1866.
The appointment of the special county com- missioners by the governor of the State was for the purpose of calling an election. At the time of these appointments Governor Crawford fixed the county seat at the town of Pleasant View, the site of which is nine miles east and four and a half miles north of the present Court House at Columbus.
The first appointment that the special coun- ty commissioners made was that of C. A. Keithley, whom they appointed justice of the peace for Pleasant View township. This was on September 13, 1866. The county commis- sioners met at the county seat and elected J. W. Wallace president of the board. The date of the election is not given. On the day of the
61
AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS.
meeting they ordered the county clerk to "draw on the Secretary of State, for law books." It seems from the old record from which I get these facts, that Julius C. Petit, the county clerk, did not attend to the duties, as the papers are all signed by D. C. Finn, the deputy.
On September 15, 1866, the county com- missioners called a general election, for State and county officers, the county officers being the following : Three county commissioners, sheriff, treasurer, assessor, Probate judge, county attorney, coroner, superintendent of pub- lic instruction, county clerk, district clerk, reg- ister of deeds and county surveyor. The elec- tion was called to be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, 1866.
On September 22, 1866, the county com- missioner appointed D. C. Finn, Probate judge, and he was sworn in on that day, and the rec- ords do not show that he continued as deputy county clerk, which it seems he might have held, had he desired it, as will appear hereafter.
The election was held that year on Novem- ber 6th, and the following county officers were elected : Representative, D. C. Finn ; county commissioners,-J. W. Wallace, U. G. Rags- dell and B. F. Norton; Probate judge, D. C. Finn; sheriff, H. B. Brown; district clerk, F. M. Logan; treasurer, D. Callahan; assessor, W. H. Norton; county clerk, William Little; register of deeds, F. M. Logan ; county super- intendent, Sidney S. Smith; county attorney, J. A. Smith; coroner, J. Miller ; county sur- veyor, C. W. Jewell. It will be seen from this list of officers elected, that D. C. Finn was elected both as Probate judge and as Repre- sentative of the county, in the State Legisla- ture. It will also be seen that F. M. Logan was elected both as district clerk and as regis- ter of deeds. At that time the elections law
did not require that the tickets should be printed at public expense ; any one could write or print his ticket. Candidates were voted for without much reference to their nominations; often they were not nominated at all; whoever received the highest number of votes for any office, whether nominated for that office or not, was duly elected to the same; and at that time, when the population of the county was sparse, and the duties of the offices light, one person was allowed to hold two offices, if elected to both. The whole number of votes cast at the election that year ( 1866) was 321.
Of the county officers elected at the general election in 1866, as far as I know, D. C. Finn, William Little and J. A. Smith are the only ones living. Finn anl Little live in Columbus, while Smith lives at Girard, Crawford County, Kansas. The whereabouts of the others can- not be learned ; it is certain that none of them are living in this county, if living at all.
Among the records of the proceedings of the county commissioners, at their July ses- sion, 1867, may be found the allowed account of William Matheney, "for assisting the county attorney in the prosecution of Jefferson Davis, $25." William Matheney is remembered by many of the old settlers. He was perhaps the first lawyer that settled at Baxter Springs, and he represented the county in the State Senate early in its history. The record also shows that the fee-bill covering the services of the grand jury, "at the last session of the court," was allowed,-$77.60. J. A. Smith was then the county attorney ; and at that session of the commissioners he was allowed $75 for prose- cuting Jefferson Davis. Who Davis was, and the crime for which he was prosecuted, will appear when we come to the chapter covering matters of that kind.
62
HISTORY OF CHEROKEE COUNTY
At the September ( 1867) session of the county commissioners, as shown of record, the commissioners made the following order :
That the office of D. C. Finn, as Judge of the Pro- bate Court, (be) declared vacant, upon the part of D. C. Finn, (he) failing to renew his bond, and also failing to hold court as the law directs him to do, and failing to keep his records at the county seat open to the in- spection of the public, as the law requires him to do.
At the same session the commissioners ap- pointed John D. Coulter as Probate judge, "in and for Cherokee County, to fill the vacancy of D. C. Finn."
For the year 1867 the following tax levy was made upon the property of Cherokee County : State tax. $659.56; school tax, $164.89; county tax, $3.287.50; total. $4,- 012.25.
THE "COUNTY SEAT WAR."
At a special election of 1867 the question of locating the county seat, permanently, was submitted to the people, there having arisen a good deal of dissatisfaction against its remain- ing at Pleasant View. Columbus and Baxter Springs were the contestants for the honor. Columbus was then known as Cherokee Center. The total number of votes cast, according to a printed statement of the matter, was 139, of which Baxter Springs received all but three. But for some reason the records were not moved at once to that place; in fact, the rec- ords were not moved to Baxter Springs until April 14, 1868, and at that in obedience to a peremptory order of the Supreme Court, under a writ of mandamus. It is said that Baxter Springs, as a matter of fact, was not then in the State of Kansas; that the survey which was afterward made, by which the south line
of the State was moved two and one quarter miles south, through a treaty with the Indians, was not made until after two or three terms of the District Court of Cherokee County had been held in the Indian Territory.
The changing of the county seat from Pleasant View to Baxter Springs did not suit the people of the county any better. On the other hand, the dissatisfaction was really greater, many thinking that the vote, moving the county seat, was fraudulent. Those who favored Columbus believed that, if a fair elec- tion could be held, they would be able to secure a change. So much was said of the matter that the commissioners were at last petitioned to call another election. It seems, from the record, that two elections were held in the month of May, 1868, the first on the 12th, the second on the 26th. At the first election the vote stood as follows: Baxter Springs, 600; Geographical Center, 639; Cherokee Center, I ; The Center, 95, or a total of 1335. No one point having received a majority of the votes cast the matter remained undecided. At the election on the 26th of May, two weeks after the other election, 1885 votes were cast. Of these Baxter Springs received 965 : Geographi- cal Center, 920. By this election Baxter Springr retained the county seat.
It would seem that by this time the county seat controversy ought to be settled; but it was not. The dissatisfaction was not in the least abated. On the contrary, it had increased. The location of the county seat six miles from the east line of the county and two miles from the south line could not be made to appear a proper measure, when the geographical center of the county offered a more convenient site and was soon to become easily accessible from all parts of the county by railroad. The people,
63
AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS.
therefore, stirred up the matter and would not allow it to quiet down. Every effort was made to bring the question before the people again, and this time to secure a final determi- nation of it. A special election was called for February 17, 1869. The vote was cast at that time, and on the 20th day, as shown of record, the county commissioners met and counted the returns, their session being held at Baxter Springs, then the county seat. The following table, showing the returns, is taken from the record :
Precincts
For Baxter Springs
For Columbus
For Peters- ville
Pleasant View
5
109
Baxter Springs
1045
31
Lyon
25
Lowell
60
93
.
Shawnee
1 30
. ...
Sherman City
108
Crawford
57
Petersville
I
22
I
Ratcliff
73
Neutral City
7
43
Neosho
42
Salamanca
66
Lola
...
352
...
Total
III8
115I
I
.
There is a bit of unwritten history con- nected with this election, which may be of in- terest here to relate, as it clears up what would always be a mystery. Outside of Baxter Springs only 73 votes had been cast for that place, and these by four precincts ; but Colum- bus received a good vote from every precinct in the county. Evidently. Baxter Springs had done a big lot of "stuffing" at the polls. It cast 1045 votes, while it is safe to say that the town did not have more than that number of inhabi- tants, men, women and children. When all the votes had been counted, except those cast by
Lola precinct, it was found that Baxter Springs was 319 ahead of Columbus. Capt. Sidney S. Smith, an ardent supporter of Columbus, see- ing that Baxter Springs had made its show- down, began to feel in his pockets for the re- turns from Lola precinct, which he claimed to have brought in. To his utter astonishment, the package was missing. He was greatly con- fused, but finally said that he must have left the package in his saddlebags, at the hotel ; that he would go to the hotel and make a search for it. He was gone two or three hours, and came back without the package, seemingly very de- jected over the loss of the returns, which, if not found, would leave the matter as before the election, Baxter Springs still holding the coun- ty seat. Finally he gathered up the tail of his overcoat, as if accidentally, and it was found that the package had slipped down into the lining of the coat. He cut it out, produced the returns to the commissioners, and when they were counted, Columbus was 33 ahead of Bax- ter Springs, as the above table shows.
As showing that each faction in the county seat contest had grounds for suspecting the other of fraud, it may be noted that, in the election of 1876. a presidential year, when it is presumed that every precinct brought out every available voter, the total number of votes cast by Baxter Springs was 218, and that the total vote cast by Lola precinct was 130. This was seven years after the county seat contest. when the population of the precincts must have been double what it was at the election of 1869.
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.