History of Monroe County, Michigan, Part 30

Author: Wing, Talcott Enoch, 1819-1890, ed
Publication date: 1890
Publisher: New York, Munsell & company
Number of Pages: 882

USA > Michigan > Monroe County > History of Monroe County, Michigan > Part 30

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).

in their work, was considered the hest. It was estimated that when the scraper was well filled every three linear feet of it contained a cubic yard of earth.

In 1850 a committee consisting of H. V. Man, C. G. Johnson, A. A. Rabinean, I. R. Grosvenor and R. O'Connor, were appointed at a public meeting to investigate into the true financial condition of the city, its indebted- ness, and if possible the causes of such indebt- edness, in order that our citizens may be enabled in future to guard against a repetition of like evils.

I give below an extract from the report of the committee in regard to the canal loan, canal expenditures, etc., in order that the . present generation may see that if we do not manage our city government at the present time infinitely better than our fathers did, we do fully as well, and that there are probably no more jobs and politics in the city government as it is now conducted than there were when our forefathers held down the aldermanic chairs.

EXTRACT FROM REPORT.

It seems to have been contemplated when the charter of our city was obtained in the year 1837, to procure a loan or vote a tax for the completion of the ship canal previously commenced by the General Government, as we find in the act of incorporation provision made for a loan or tax, not exceeding $50,000. A move- ment was made in 1838 under this authority. The first step taken by the council, after a vote in its favor purporting to have been made by the people, was on the 20th day of August, 1838, appointing an agent to proceed East to negotiate a loan of $25,000. This was effected by said agent by an exchange of the bonds of the city for the stock of the North American Trust and Banking Company of the city of New York for a similar amount. The stock of the Trust Company was then pledged to the Mechanics and Farmers' Bank, of Albany, and a loan obtained of $25,000, said stock being held as collateral security and the city said to be responsible for the depreciation that might arise from a fall in the market value of the same. A further guaranty was required by the bank at Albany and claimed to have been given in behalf of the city by several gentle- men residing at Troy and Albany, they being owners of property near the present landing

178

HISTORY OF MONROE COUNTY, MICHIGAN.

and in the vicinity of the spot where the said loan was proposed to be expended - not, how- ever, for the full amount thereof, but limited to $10,000, as appears by the record on the 22d of October following. The powers given to the agent seem to have been broad, for, in the words of the resolution " The common council say they do hereby invest him (the agent) with all the powers and authority invested in them (the council) by the charter of the city and the amendments thereto, so far as relates to the negotiation of said loan." Thus it will appear that while it was necessary under the law to obtain a vote of the people for a loan of 825,000, the council by their subsequent ap- proval of this arrangement, seem to have vir- tually contracted a debt of a much larger sum ;. for the stock of said Trust Company has been, at times, of scarce any value, and at the present day is quoted at about ninety per cent. below par. Had the loss of this stock fallen on the city, as it might have done, if it was liable, certainly to the extent of $10,000 if not to the whole sum, it would have rendered the evils of onr situation much greater, and ought to serve as a caution in future to reject altogether any proposition to involve the city in debt. A compromise was made, and the city was finally relieved from these demands by relinquishing their claim upon the bank at Albany for $2,000 of the loan which had been withheld by them on that account. It is proper here to state that it was claimed by the agent who negotiated the loan, that the city was not to be held accountable for the loss or depreciation on the stock before referred to. But subsequent proceedings go to show that other parties to the contract thought differently, and the final action appears to confirm it. The committee are, however, of the opinion that the proceed- ings were illegal from first to last

On or about the 27th of October, 1838, the commissioners of the canal fund were informed that the money was subject to their draft, and the work was commenced. The treasurer's accounts on the 4th of November, 1838, show a credit of $23,000, drawn from the bank at Albany or transferred to the credit of the Bank of River Raisin and the Merchants and Me- chanics' Bankof Monroe. At a meeting of the commissioners on the 4th of November, 1838, proposals were made by Luther Harvey and others to take the contract for the work, esti-

mated at 55,000 cubic yards, at 40 cents per yard, amounting to the sum of $22,000. This proposition was rejected, two members of the board dissenting. One of them, the aeting commissioner, believing that it would have been more judicious to let the work by con- tract, resigned his appointment. The board then proceeded with the work under their own supervision, appointing another acting com- missioner, and placing in his hands the sum of $5,000 to expend on the same. A proposal was submitted at this time by the River Raisin Bank and Merchants and Mechanics' Bank for the use of the funds, $15,000, to be put to the credit of the former, and $10,000 to that of the latter, they to pay the agent of the city for his services in negotiating said loan, but not to pay any interest. This proposition seems to have been accepted. The committee can see no good reason why this money was withdrawn from the bank at Albany and deposited in the banks here, as by the report of the agent the city was to have been allowed interest at the rate of two per cent. by the bank at Albany. Eastern drafts at that time were at an un- usually high rate of premium, the profit of which was thus given to those banks. A sum in all probability equal to $2,000, if not much more, was thus relinquished for their benefit. How much they paid the agent for his services does not appear. The banks did agree by their proposals to pay out on the works the bills of specie-paying banks. How far this was complied with the committee are unable to say ; but it is reasonable to suppose that they availed themselves of every opportunity to pay out their own notes instead thereof, the differ- ence being very great, as there was at this time a general suspension of specie payments, and but one or two banks in the State contin- ued to redeem their notes.

Up to the 13th of August, 1839, the board had expended in all upon the work the sum of $19,611.40, when it was entirely arrested in its further progress by the failure of the Mer- chants and Mechanics' Bank, and soon after by the River Raisin Bank. In the former at the time of its failure there remained the sum of $2,633.45, and in the latter the sum of $755.12. The Bank of Albany had also at this time re- fused to pay the balance of the loan, being $2,000 before alluded to, alleging that the stock of the Trust Company had depreciated, and

179

HARBOR IMPROVEMENTS.

claiming the difference of the city. Thus it will be seen that more than one-fifth of the loan was at a critical time rendered unavail- able to the prosecution of the work, causing by its interruption great injury, no doubt, to that which had been done. On the 7th of April, 1840, the board presented a report of their doings, and claimed to have finished 45,000 cubic yards out of 55,000 as estimated for the whole work, and say " but for the stop- page of the banks the loan would have been more than sufficient to finish the entire work." About 85,000, say they, would be more than sufficient to finish the entire work. Yet that sum has been expended with $14,000 more by subsequent taxation, and still it is not entirely finished

We present below an abstract of the amount expended up to this period, and invite the at - tention of our fellow-citizens to the fact that so small a proportion appears to have been paid out for actual labor on the work. It is a fact that is to be taken into consideration when we are asked to vote for this or that appropriation and it is desirable to know how much of any sum is necessarily absorbed in preliminary proceedings, or consumed in injudicious man- agement of public affairs.

Abstract of amounts expended out of Canal Fund to date, August 13, 1849.

Interest for six months on loan __

$ 875 00

Traveling expenses of agent

200 25

Council fees

70 50

Printing

47 00

Postage

15 75

Officers and superintendents. 2,049 62

Surveying

23 63

$3,281 75

Pork, pork barrels and salt $4,555 06

Deduct pork sold

885 96

Flour

658 00

Beef

47 75

Potatoes

71 18

Beans

48 75

Groceries

387 67

1,213 35

Blankets and dry goods

$ 356 15

Crockery

48 30

Wood.

130 25

Hardware

$ 351 49

Blacksmithing

238 0S

Stationery

6 91

Wheelbarrows

226 25

Boat

8 00

Timber, lumber, etc.

2 052 02

2,882 75

Labor

7,997 63

Sundries

32 12

$19,611 40

An examination of the foregoing items will present the following result: A loan in the hands of the commissioners of the canal fund, of $25,000, disposed of as follows:

Official services, counsel fees, print-

ing, etc. $2,406 75

Interest on loan 875 00

Pork and other provisions 4,882 45

Blankets, dry goods, etc. 534 70

Material, lumber, etc. 2,915 87

Labor 7,997 63

Deposited in broken banks and

withheld on pretense of claims 5,388 60

$25,000

Thus it appears that out of the large sum of $25,000 only $7,997.63 was paid out in money for labor, $2,882.75 for material, etc., $5,417.15 for pork, provisions, blankets, etc., leaving about $2,400 consumed chiefly in salaries in a period of time but little over nine months. Among the items of provisions we observe an extraordinary disbursement for pork. We can conceive of no just excuse for such an appro- priation of the funds of the city. Was it a speculation entered into in its behalf? This cannot be supposed, for we find no anthority for such an operation. It might have been considered a safe investment, and perhaps proved better than a deposit in the banks ; yet it was an inconvenient sort of currency. It would not have been necessary for the prose- cution of the work, as at all times money has been much more available for labor than any description of dicker. The accounts show that some of it was sold to the merchants in town, and, as the committee believe, a portion of it was ultimately lost.

After the failure of the banks, it would ap- pear that nearly a year elapsed before any- thing more was done on the work. On the 2d of November, 1840, George W. Strong made application to the board, and they concluded a contract with him to complete the canal on the following terms, viz. :

In personal property in hands of commis- sioners $770 90

In debts due them

640 SS

Balance in River Raisin Bank

670 69

Balance in Merchants and Mechanics' Bank

2,533 45

$4,615 92

to be paid to him upon the completion thereof by drafts on said banks, which he was to take in payment whether paid by the banks or not. This was a favorable contract for the eity under the circumstances, but if the means of the board

3,669 10

534 70

180

HISTORY OF MONROE COUNTY, MICHIGAN.

had been in their own hands instead of insolv- ent banks they could doubtless have effected a much more favorable contract.

On the 29th of August, 1843, the council made another contract with Mr. Strong, associ- ated with Mr. Campbell, for the further pros- ecution of the work or completion thereof, for the sum of 87,250, to be paid $500 in advance, $5,000 as the work progressed, and $1,750 out of a tax to be collected thereafter. This con- tract was based upon the expectation of a vote of the freeholders authorizing another loan of $10,000. The same was obtained on the 11th of October following; but instead of a loan an issue was made of bonds, which were in fact paid ont upon the contract. There was a form of borrowing and lending, yet there was no money passing. Of this loan of $10,000, levied and collected by special tax upon the people in the year 1843, to pay the bonds last above re- ferred to, the following is the disposition :

Interest on first loan $ 795 69

Printing

318 84

Stationery

15 41

Salaries and other services

1,342 66

Redemption of bonds

12 50

$2,485 10

Campbell & Strong, on contract

4,870 00

Excavator purchased of Campbell & Strong

1,000 00

Expended at Bar Point under direction of Mr. Disbrow 1,804 94

$10,160 04

The surplus was probably out of city funds. By the preceding statement it will be seen that out of said tax of $10,000, there was paid to Campbell and Strong upon their contract only $4,870, leaving due to them, when it should be completed, the sum of $2,380, to be raised by another tax or paid out of other funds than those provided for it. In addition to this, Messrs. Campbell & Strong presented the fol- lowing account on the 18th of February, 1845 :

Extra work and hinderance by washing of banks in consequence of running boats __ $2,009 64

Extra work upper end of canal 222 32

Lost time and damage in consequence of injunction. 200 00

Discount on funds received 560 00

$2,991 96

Of these items the council allowed $1,654.82. These sums must have drawn heavily upon subsequent appropriations for the canal, and finally, as we believe, upon the general taxes of the city.

The sum expended at Bar Point under the direction of H. Disbrow consisted of the fol- lowing items :

Superintending, &c

$197 50

Surveying

8 00

Boat

2 25

Timber, &c.

10 02

Rope, tools, &c

168 76

Repairs of dredge

15 30

Board

22 00

Labor on work

1,381 11

$1,804 94

When the settlement of this and the preced- ing contract of the city with Campbell & Strong took place, they were to have been paid the balance due them by agreement, in leases and canal bonds to the amount of $1,438.06.

Instead thereof they received in canal bonds $400 00

Leases 266 23

City orders 771 83 -- $1,438 06

Also, the further sum allowed them for interest on their ac- count 143 30

And it here will be noted that a sum that should and only could be legally raised by a vote of the people, is taken out of the general fund and thus collected from personal prop- erty, which is not holden under the law for any part of such expenditures.

Another loan, or rather tax, is voted by the willing people on the 17th of March, 1848, of $4,000, and a contract immediately made with H. W. Campbell for the completion of the work again for $4,000. An additional allow- ance was subsequently made to him of $104.79 for discount on funds previously paid to him, upon which he claims to have sustained a loss of ten per cent., but which the committee are assured, a large part was used by him at the par value thereof. The final payments of the balance, amounting to $1.200, due to Messrs. Strong & Campbell and to H. W. Campbell on their several contracts, was paid only a few days ago (February 7, 1850), out of the taxes collected for 1849.

This is a brief history of the amount loaned for canal purposes, or raised by direct tax upon the inhabitants, for the prosecution of the work, the several contracts founded upon the same, and the manner in which the money has been disposed of.

CHAPTER XVL.

THE TOLEDO WAR.

U INDER the ordinance of 1787, the territory northwest of the Ohio River was given a temporary government under the nanie of the Territory of the Northwest. It embraced what now constitutes the States of Ohio, Michi- gan, Indiana, Illinois and Wisconsin. In 1796, the Northwest Territory was composed of five counties, with names and boundaries as fol- lows: Wayne - including the settlements on the Maumee, Raisin and Detroit Rivers, with its seat of justice at Detroit; Washington - comprising all that portion of the present State of Ohio within forty miles of the Ohio river and between the Little Miami and Muskingum rivers, with Marietta for its county seat ; Ham- ilton -- embracing the region between the Little and the Great Miami, and within forty miles of the Ohio, with Cincinnati as the seat of justice ; Knox-containing the country near to the Ohio and between the Great Miami and the Wabash Rivers, having Vincennes as its county seat; and St. Clair- embracing the settlements upon the Illinois and Kaskaskia Rivers, as well as those upon the Upper Mis- sissippi, the seat of justice being at Kaskaskia.

By the ordinance of 1787, it was provided, that when a State should be formed of the east- ern portion of the Territory, it would include the territory " lying north of line drawn east and west, through the southern extreme of Lake Michigan," which should remain a por- tion of such State until such territory should contain 60,000 inhabitants. In disregard of this provision, however, the enabling act of Congress (1802) providing for the organization of the State of Ohio, fixed the northern bound- ary of the proposed State on the line above mentioned, whereby what is now Michigan was excluded from the proposed State and attached to the Territory of Indiana, with its seat of government at Vincennes, a distant and very inconvenient point. This was very un- satisfactory to the inhabitants of that region,

who protested positively against it. It was not long, however (1805), before the Territory of Michigan was established, with its capital at Detroit.

There were several questions growing out of and connected with the organization of the State of Ohio, which co-operated to cause mis- understanding and unkind feelings between the people of what is now Ohio and those of Michigan. In the first place, the general senti- ment seems to have been that the movement for the formation of a State Government was premature and unwise. It was not the act of the territorial legislature or of the people, as in other like cases, but solely that of Congress, not only without suggestion by the local authorities, but against their known will, and upon the petition of a few individuals speaking only for themselves. As already suggested, this state of things was then believed to be due to partisan ends songht in the formation of the State. Judge Burnet in his " Notes on the Northwestern Territory " says that so strong was the popular feeling against Jefferson and for Mr. Adams in the bitter contest of 1800, that there were in Hamilton county but four persons known to him as supporting the former, to wit: Major David Zeigler, William Henry Harrison (afterwards President), William Mc- Millan and John Smith. The feeling in Wayne county, now Michigan, if anything, was even more decided in the same direction.

But the most serious of the results of the separation of Wayne county from Ohio in 1802, are not found in the partisan divisions of that day. They were developed in the ques- tion of boundary, which assumed grave magni- tude several years later. Of this, it will be fitting here to make as brief a statement as may be consistent with a proper understanding of its merits :

1. As already stated, by the ordinance of 1787, creating the Territory Northwest of the

[181]

182

HISTORY OF MONROE COUNTY, MICHIGAN.

Ohio, the line provided for the northern boundary of the State to be formed of that ter- ritory (subsequently the State of Ohio) was "an east and west line, drawn through the southerly bend or extreme of Lake Michigan."

2. By the enabling act of Congress, under which the State of Ohio was organized in 1802, the northern boundary of the same was stated as " an east and west line drawn through the southerly extreme of Lake Michigan."

3. The State constitution, formed under said authority, declared the northern boundary of the State to be " an east and west line, drawn through the southerly extreme of Lake Michi- gan, running east," " until it shall intersect Lake Erie or the territorial line ;

" Provided, That if the southerly bend or ex- treme of Lake Michigan should extend so far south that a line drawn due cast from it would not intersect Lake Erie, or if it should inter- sect Lake Erie east of the mouth of the Miami of the Lake (the Maumee River), then and in that case, with the assent of Congress, the northern boundary of this State shall be established by, and extending to, a direct line running from the southern extremity of Lake Michigan to the most northerly cape of the Miami (Maumee) Bay, after intersecting the due north line from the mouth of the Great Miami River."

As will be seen the question of boundary thus presented rested on what should prove to be the eastern termination of a line drawn due cast from the extreme of Lake Michigan, the uncertainty as to which seems to have been recognized by the Ohio convention and care- fully provided against in fixing the northern line of the proposed State. In his " Notes," Judge Jacob Burnet, a prominent and active member of that convention, and subsequently a United States Senator from Ohio, says it was generally known to those who had consulted the maps of the Western country extant at the time the ordinance of 1787 was passed, that Lake Michigan was represented thereon as far north of the position which it has since been ascertained to occupy. On a map in the State Department, which was the guide of the committee of Congress who framed the ordi- nance of 1787, the southern extreme of that lake was laid down as near the 42d degree of north latitude; and there was a pencil line passing through the southern bend of the lake to the Canada line, which intersected the strait

·between the River Raisin (Monroe) and De- troit. Judge Burnet says " that line was mani- festly intended by the committee and by Con- gress, to be the northern boundary of this State; and on the principles on which courts of chancery construe contracts, accompanied by plats, that map and the line marked on it should have been taken as conclusive evidence of the boundary, without reference to the actual position of the southern extreme of the Lake." During the session of the Ohio convention, says the same authority, it was the common understanding that the maps in use were not correct, and that the line should terminate at some point on the strait, far above Maumee Bay. But while the matter was under discus- sion, a man who had hunted many years on Lake Michigan, and thus was well acquainted with its position, happened to be at Chilli- cothe, and in conversation mentioned that the lake extended further south than was generally supposed ; and that a map he had seen placed its southern bend many miles north of its true position. The effect of such statement was serious apprehension on the subject, and led to the change of line from that named in the en- abling act to the one set forth in the State constitution.

It is said that this change at the time was regarded as so serious a matter that some members of the convention hesitated to adopt it, lest it be rejected by Congress and the ad- mission of the State into the Union thereby be postponed. But it was finally adopted and subsequently approved by Congress, in the acceptance of the State with its boundary so fixed. Major B. F. Stickney says the man who gave the information at Chillicothe in regard to Lake Michigan's real position, was named Wells, and that he had been long a prisoner with the Indians in that region, and had thus become familiar with the facts.

The declaration of war with England, which followed in June, postponed action in this mat- ter beyond the passage of a resolution by Congress directing a survey of the boundary line to be made. No steps to that end were taken until 1816-17, when Governor Cass in behalf of Michigan, took measures to secure a survey. The consent of the Indians, who yet held most of the country through which the line would pass, was obtained by Major B. F. Stickney, by request of Governor Cass, when

183

THE TOLEDO WAR.

the General Land Office directed a survey- or (William Harris) to run the line. When this was accomplished, it was discovered by Governor Cass that the Land Office bad fur- nished the surveyor with a copy of the con- stitution of Ohio, instead of the ordinance of 1787 or the enabling act of 1802, for his guide. To this Governor Cass made vigorous protest and complaint, when President Monroe directed a second line to be run dne east from the southern extreme of Lake Michigan. John A. Fulton was the surveyor in this case. Hence, we have the " Harris line," as claimed by Ohio ; and the " Fulton line," as claimed on the part of Michigan.

While the important question raised by these two lines was at the time recognized in Con- gress, as well as in Ohio and in Michigan, no steps were taken toward settling it for many years thereafter. Meantime, the disputed ter- ritory continued largely under the jurisdiction of Michigan. Now and then the matter would come up, as in 1821, when the assessor of Waynesfield township, Wood county, Ohio, undertook to list for taxation the property of settlers between the Harris and Fulton lines.

It was not until the northern outlet of the Miami and Erie Canal came up for decision, that the boundary question assumed an import- ance which conld challenge the attention of the residents. The connection of the two matters will be seen from the fact, as then assumed, that the most desirable point for such terminus was at Toledo, within the disputed territory. The thought of Ohio constructing so expensive a channel of trade, and then turning its traffic into a Michigan port, was not to be enter- tained ; while Michigan, no doubt, was not a little anxious to avail herself of whatever ad- vantage might thus be derived from a neigh- bor's necessity.

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.

History of Monroe County, Michigan, Part 30

Author: Wing, Talcott Enoch, 1819-1890, ed Publication date: 1890 Publisher: New York, Munsell & company Number of Pages: 882

Author: Wing, Talcott Enoch, 1819-1890, ed
Publication date: 1890
Publisher: New York, Munsell & company
Number of Pages: 882