Twentieth Century History of Findlay and Hancock County, Ohio, and Representative Citizens, Part 14

Author: Jacob Anthony Kimmell
Publication date: 1910
Publisher:
Number of Pages: 1189

USA > Ohio > Hancock County > Findlay > Twentieth Century History of Findlay and Hancock County, Ohio, and Representative Citizens > Part 14

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).

Digitized by Google

123

HISTORY OF HANCOCK COUNTY

and on the 2nd of August, 1862, was admitted to the bar. He was then twenty-two years of age. He then settled down in Findlay and has ever since been creditably identified with the legal profession here.

The following is a list of the attorneys, who are practicing their profession in this city :

Axline & Betts, O. A. Ballard, Charles V. Bish, J. C. Bitler, Blackford & Blackford, E. V. Bope, W. F. Brickman, N. W. Bright, Burket & Burket, R. K. Carlin, W. L. Carlin, W. W. Chapman, J. J. Cole, R. D. Cole, R. Clint Cole, S. J. Williams, J. N. Doty, E. T. Dunn, B. L. Dunn, M. G. Foster, Franklin Franks, John Franks, A. G. Fuller, T. F. Gillespie, Alfred Graber, J. M. Harrison, C. E. Jordon, A. E. Kerns, T. W. Lang, Thomas Meehan, G. F. Pendleton, G. H. Phelps, Poe & Poe, J. E. Priddy, G. W. Ross, M. C. Shafer, John Sher- idan, John D. Snyder, Hiram Van Campen, B. W. Waltermire, R. J. Wetherald, Albert Zugschwert.

HANCOCK COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION.

In pursuance to a call which had been circu- lated among the attorneys of Findlay, upwards of thirty members of the legal fraternity met at 4 o'clock Saturday afternoon, March 11, 1899, in the Circuit Court room. On motion Mr. Aaron Blackford was chosen chairman and Silas E. Hurin secretary. Mr. E. T. Dunn of- fered a motion to the effect that it was the sense of those present that a bar association should be formed. After remarks by several of the attorneys, Mr. Dunn's motion was adopted.

Mr. George W. Ross then moved that the chair appoint a committee of five to formulate a constitution and by-laws. The motion being carried, Messrs. J. A. Bope, E. T. Dunn, George W. Ross, Jason Blackford and Harlan

F. Burket were named as the committee. A constitution and by-laws having been adopted, meetings were held from time to time, and to- day the association is one that will compare well in the matter of qualifications, clear-mind- edness and capability, with any that can be pro- duced in this state.

MURDERS AND MURDER TRIALS.

In 1846 a horse was stolen in Hardin Coun- ty, and the thief was pursued through this county, several persons here joining in the chase. Amongst them was John Parish, who resided in Williamstown, in this county. At Van Buren the thief was over- taken, and being hard pressed, left his horse and took to the fields about a mile beyond the village. Parish at once dismounted and pursued him. Overtaking him in the field, he closed with him, finally overpowering him. He then gave the signal for the others to approach, but while doing so, the thief pulled his revolver and shot Parish dead, making his escape. Afterward a man who gave his name as Benjamin F. Dulin, was arrested, charged with being the murderer. After an imprisonment of some months in the county jail, he had a preliminary hear- ing before the associate judges of the Com- mon Pleas Court. A large number of wit- nesses were present from Lake and Geauga Counties, in the interest of the prisoner and he succeeded in proving an alibi and was discharged. It was, however, pretty generally believed that Dulin was the mur- derer. The prosecution was conducted by the late Abel F. Parker, who was prosecut- ing attorney, assisted by Aaron H. Bigelow. The prisoner was defended by Judge M. C. Whiteley and William M. Patterson. The

Digitized by Google

124

HISTORY OF HANCOCK COUNTY

real murderer, if Dulin was not, was never apprehended.

William Foster, a resident of Jackson Township, was indicted at the November term of court in 1856, for murder in the second degree, for the killing of his son, Andrew. Foster, it seems, was of a weak mind, irritable and easily influenced by others. He had married a second time, the mother of Andrew being dead. The boy was about fifteen years old, and he and his step-mother could not agree, and all mis- conduct, or supposed misconduct of the boy, was reported to his father, who be- came excited, and without inquiry would punish the boy severely. The boy was ap- parently possessed of a morbid appetite ; his hunger was never appeased. He would even get up in the night and seek food. On one occasion, some food which had been prepared the evening before, was found to have been taken during the night. Its loss was charged to Andrew, and his father in a rage made an assault on him. The boy was afterwards found terribly bruised and injured in loins and back. From these wounds he afterwards died, and his father was arrested, indicted and tried for the killing. Judge Whiteley, who defended the prisoner, said afterwards that it did not cer- tainly appear on the trial just who did in- flict the wounds, as some evidence tended to show that the step-mother had also taken a part in the assault. Foster was tried at the April term in 1856. The verdict was man- slaughter, and a sentence of five years in the penitentiary at hard labor was imposed. After serving about two years he died.

On the part of the State the trial was conducted by William Gribben, prosecut-

ing attorney, assisted by William Mungen; the defence by M. C. Whiteley and Andrew Coffinberry.

There lived in Findlay in 1868, a man by the name of Adam Conkle, who had a wife whose character was not above reproach, and it was alleged that she had been fre- quently visited by one James Winnell, a young man employed about the offices of the court house as copyist. He was almost a stranger, and but little known of him, but he was generally regarded as a dissi- pated rough. He was, however, a fine pen- man. His visits to Mrs. Conkle coming to the knowledge of her husband, the latter warned Winnell not to come near his house, nor to hold any communication whatever with his wife, on penalty of being killed. But Winnell, whilst on one of his sprees, in April, 1868, visited the residence of Conkle, who then resided on East Main Cross Street. Being apprised of Winnell's visit, Conkle immediately hurried home, and on ascending the stairs, found Winnell and his wife in a room together. He of course, being highly excited, commanded Winnell to leave, who no doubt being afraid of bodily harm, seized a cavalry saber which happened to be in the room, assaulted Conkle, drove him from the room, and made his escape down the stair- way. Thereupon Conkle seized a loaded shotgun standing in the hall and gave pur- suit. Winnell fled across the lot in the rear of the house, scaled the fence into what is known as Hyatt's Alley, and made his way westward toward Main Street, hotly pursued by Conkle. When about two hundred feet east of Main Street, Win- nell being closely pressed, turned upon

----

Digitized by Google

125

HISTORY OF HANCOCK COUNTY

Conkle with the saber which he still re- tained, when Conkle fired at him, the charge entering near the left temple, causing in- stant death.

Conkle gave himself up, and after a cor- oner's inquest was held on the body of Winnell, had a preliminary hearing before E. T. Dunn, Esq., who held him to answer to the Grand Jury, in a bond of $1,500. The said jury, in October, 1868, returned a true bill of indictment for murder in the second degree. The trial was held in November, 1868, with Judge James Pillars on the bench. The prosecution was conducted by William Anderson, who was then prose- cuting attorney, assisted by A. B. Shaffer. The defence was conducted by Henry Brown and A. Blackford, of Findlay, and W. V. Layton, of Wapakonetta. A great number of witnesses were examined, and the case was closely tried. The defence was that the prisoner, at the time of killing, was acting in self-defence, having been at- tacked by Winnell with a deadly weapon. Verdict of the jury, not guilty. The verdict was generally regarded as a just one. Conkle left the county at once, and was lost sight of from that day. The woman in the case also left before the day of trial, and has never returned.

On the morning of February 3, 1873. Jacob Gartee, a young man about twenty years of age, and whose parents resided in the town, deliberately murdered Nicolas Bensing, residing on the farm of M. D. Shaffer, Esq., just east of town, on the Tif- fin road. Sheriff James L. Henry, Coroner Karst and Marshal John Ruhl had already, during the night, been informed of the murder, it having occurred early in the

evening of the 2nd of February, and were on the ground, and before daylight of the 3rd had the murderer under arrest. The facts, as they afterwards developed, were substantially as follows: Gartee had been in the employ of Bensing for some time, chopping wood, and he boarded in the fam- ily. On the night of the murder, having armed himself with a single barreled pistol, he gave notice at the supper table that he was going into town. Mrs. Bensing, the wife of the murdered man, gave him a let- ter to mail, and he started, but instead of going directly to town, he concealed him- self in the log barn in which the chickens were kept, and by causing an alarm among the chickens, he induced Bensing to ap- proach to ascertain the cause. When the latter was within a few feet of him he placed the pistol between the logs and fired, strik- ing Bensing in the breast, who retreated a few steps, fell and expired just as his wife, who had been alarmed by the report, ar- rived on the scene. Gartee then ran down the lane to the Tiffin road near the resi- dence of William Snyder and thence pro- ceeded to town.

After remaining in town a short time, he started to return to Bensing's, but was met on the road by a messenger, who informed him of Bensing's death, and a request that he return to town and inform the friends of the murdered man. Gartee returned with the friends and the officers, having be- come convinced that Gartee was the mur- derer, John Ruhl boldly charged him with the crime, which he admitted, and pointed out the place where the pistol was secreted. He was immediately arrested and lodged in jail. There were some ugly rumors

Digitized by Google

126

HISTORY OF HANCOCK COUNTY

afloat to the effect that the wife of the mur- well as on the final trial, the circumstances dered man was perhaps a party to the crime; and the fact that the prisoner and the murdered man were good friends and had had no quarrel, and the further fact that there was no apparent cause for the commission of such a cold blooded murder, gave some color to the truth of these rumors. At the preliminary examination held before D. B. Beardsley, J. P., which was a most rigid one, so far as Mrs. Bensing was concerned, no evidence sustaining the theory of her guilt was found. Gartee was committed without bail for the crime of murder, and on May 28, 1873, the Grand Jury returned an indictment of murder in the first degree. The case came up for trial, on a plea of not guilty, before Judge Pillars, and a carefully selected jury. The trial began on the 29th day of July and lasted about ten days.

The plea for the defence was insanity. The prosecution was conducted by Prose- cuting Attorney George F. Pendleton and W. H. Anderson, and the prisoner defended by Henry Brown and M. D. Shaffer. The verdict of the jury was "murder in the sec- ond degree." The prisoner was sentenced to the penitentiary for life, at which place he died in less than a year from the time of his sentence.

connected with the case were developed about as follows: Mrs. Charles had made bread from flour purchased shortly before at Ada, O., and the family partaking of it, became suddenly sick, eleven of them in all, and Mrs. Charles died from its effects. The prosecution had two theories regarding the matter. One was, that the flour, after be- ing purchased at Ada, had remained in the wagon standing in an alley, while the fam- ily were at dinner, and that whilst there, the sack had been opened by the prisoner and poison introduced, which showed its presence in the bread. The other theory was that the poison-arsenic-had been placed in the yeast crock at the house of the murdered woman, by Isaac B. Charles while on a visit to the family, and that the poison had been obtained from a quantity purchased by John Charles, husband of the woman, for the purpose of killing rats, and left in the room where the yeast crock stood, which was a kind of up-ground cellar. The cause for the poisoning-for there seemed no apparent one-was said to be found in the fact that Isaac B. Charles, hav- ing been formerly treasurer of the village of Ada, and about to become a defaulter, made use of a large sum of money belong- ing to the estate of his father, of which estate he was administrator, and now that a settlement was to be made, formed a plan of murdering, by poison or otherwise, all who stood between himself and the balance of his father's fortune, and that the poison- ing of this family was but the first step in the plan.

The death by poison, of Mrs. Malissa Charles, wife of John Charles, on the 6th day of June, 1876, threw Orange Township and all that part of the county into a state of wild excitement, which was intensified when it was known that Isaac B. Charles, a brother of the husband of the deceased, had been arrested, charged with the crime of murder. At the preliminary examina- An indictment for "Murder by Poison" tion, before William M. Mckinley, Esq., as was found on the 21st of October, 1876.

Digitized by Google

127

HISTORY OF HANCOCK COUNTY

After much delay and the interpositions of most everybody in the village, or who came a number of motions, the case was finally to it, was regarded with suspicion by one side or the other. The killing was done on the 15th day of November, 1877, and the court being then in session, a special Grand Jury was duly impanelled on the 5th day of December, which returned a verdict of "Murder in the First Degree." tried in January, 1877, before Judge Pillars and a jury on a general plea of "Not guilty." The verdict rendered was "Guilty of Mur- der in Second Degree." The prosecution was ably conducted by Henry Brown, pros- ecuting attorney, assisted by Frank H. Dougherty, of Kenton, and W. H. White- ley, of Findlay, and the defense was stub- bornly made by A. Blackford, J. F. Burkett and J. H. Smick, of Ada. Charles was sen- tenced to the penitentiary for life, but after serving about twenty-five years was pa- roled upon the condition that he was never to return to Hancock County.

Professional jealousy gave rise to one serious crime in the history of our county. In 1877 there lived in the village of Benton Ridge, this county, Henry K. Nott and Frank H. Knapp, both practicing physi- cians. Unfortunately there had sprung up bad feelings between the two, the result, no doubt, of professional jealousy and the over-officious meddling by the friends of both parties, and although mutual threats had been made, no one could believe that much else than a war of words, or at the farthest, a little bout at fisticuffs would be the result. Imagine the consternation when the news spread over the village that Dr. Knapp had in broad daylight shot Dr. Nott to death, on one of the streets of the town. Dr. Knapp was at once arrested, taken before John Bergman, Esq., who at once remanded him to the jail of the county to await the action of the. Grand Jury. In- tense excitement prevailed; the friends of the two unfortunate men took sides, and for a time society was so torn up that al-

On this indictment the defendant was tried on a plea of "Not Guilty," the defense being that the shooting was done in self- defense, it being claimed that the murdered man had made an assault on the defendant just previous to the shooting, and that he . had fired two shots at the defendant intend- ing to kill him, and that to save his own life the defendant did the shooting which killed Dr. Nott. This the prosecution de- nied, and alleged and sought to prove that at the time of the shooting and just previ- ously thereto, there had been no quarrel, no meeting in fact between the parties, but that the defendant had gone to the lower end of the village, procured a gun, came back, sought out his victim, whom he found on a side street, approached him un- perceived, and without notice deliberately shot him, from the effects of which Dr. Nott immediately expired. Upon these declarations the case was tried before a jury, impanelled after all the motions and objections known in criminal practice had been made and overruled, Judge Pillars presiding. After a trial which lasted twelve days, and arguments covering three . days more, the jury returned a verdict of "Not Guilty." Prosecuting Attorney Henry Brown and E. T. Dunn conducted the prosecution, and A. Blackford and M. D. Shaffer managed the defense.

Digitized by Google

128

HISTORY OF HANCOCK COUNTY

William Trankner was indicted for murder in the first degree, having stabbed one Frank Ricksecker, September 7, 1889, from the ef- fects of which wound the said Ricksecker died the next day. Upon trial, Trankner was found guilty of manslaughter, and was sentenced to serve a term of seven years in the Ohio Pen- itentiary. Jas. A. Bope, prosecutor. Dunn, Meehan & Doty, attorneys for defendant.

Joseph Donovan was indicted for murder in the second degree, having killed one John Mc- Manness, November 3, 1889; was tried and found guilty. He was sentenced by Judge A. B. Johnson, to five years in the Ohio Peniten- tiary. Harlan F. Burket, prosecutor, assisted by Jas. A. Bope. E. T. Dunn, attorney for de- fendant.

James Lawson was indicted for first degree murder and was found guilty of manslaughter, at the October term of court, 1892. He was sentenced to three years in the Ohio Peniten- tiary.

George Karg for the killing of one Abraham Wise was indicted by the Grand Jury, at the September term of court, 1895, was found guilty of manslaughter and sentenced to the penitentiary for a period of ten years. Theo. Totten, prosecutor. E. T. Dunn and C. W. Bente, attorneys for defendant.

On the 3d day of August, 1896, Amos Decker shot and killed one George Miles. He was indicted by the Grand Jury for first de- gree murder. At the close of the evidence of- fered by the State, Decker tendered a plea of guilty of manslaughter, which was accepted and he was sentenced to serve a term of twenty years at hard labor in the Ohio penitentiary. Theo. Totten, prosecutor. E. T. Dunn and John Poe, attorneys for defendant.

On the 20th day of February, 1898, while

attempting to capture and arrest Frank Car- men and Edward Pratt, who were burglariz- ing a storehouse of the New York, Chicago and St. Louis Railroad Company, Police Offi- cer William Holly was shot and killed. The two men were taken and indicted jointly for murder in the first degree. Separate trials were had for these men which resulted in the acquittal of Pratt and the conviction of Car- men of manslaughter. Carmen was sentenced by Judge Charles M. Melhorn, to the Ohio penitentiary for a term of twenty years. Charles E. Jordan, prosecutor. John Poe, at- torney for defendants.

As the result of a drunken brawl, John Sher- man met his death at the hands of his brother- in-law William Teal, May 9, 1907. Teal was indicted by the Grand Jury, June 3d, 1907, for murder in the second degree. His trial began on the 7th day of October, that year, and the jury returned its verdict of guilty of man- slaughter, on the 11th day of the same month. Ten days later he was sentenced by Judge Will- iam F. Duncan, to serve a term of ten years in the Ohio penitentiary. Prosecutor, William L. David. Attorney for defendant, E. T. Dunn.

As the result of a quarrel over a game of craps, Arthur White, a colored man, met his death at the hands of one, Richard Drake, also colored. White died July 12, 1904, just seven days after having been stabbed by his assail- ant, who was later indicted by the Grand Jury upon a charge of murder in the second degree, was tried at the September, 1904, term of court, found guilty as charged, and sentenced to five years in the Ohio penitentiary. Drake's attor- ney, Charles V. Bish, prosecuted error to the Circuit Court and succeeded in reversing the judgment of the Common Pleas Court, secur-

Digitized by Google

129

HISTORY OF HANCOCK COUNTY

ing a new trial for his client. Upon the second trial, February 4, 1905, Drake was acquitted of the charge. Prosecuting attorney, William L. David. Counsel for defendant, C. V. Bish.

There were a few other indictments found for felonies of the kind treated of in this chap- ter, but the parties were never put on trial un- der the indictments. In 1854, Philemon P. Pool was indicted for an assault with intent to kill. Samuel Ramsey was indicted for stab- bing Nicolas Oram with intent to kill. Dr. R. J. Haggerty was indicted for the killing of Dr. Mansfield at Mt. Blanchard, and Levi Chain was indicted for the killing of his son at Find- lay, by stabbing him with his pocket knife. All these cases were disposed of on pleas for lesser offenses.

FIRST JAIL AND COURTHOUSE.

In July, 1830, the county commissioners de- termined to build a jail, and it was ordered that said jail should be "sixteen feet wide, and twenty-four feet long, with a partition in the center. The timber to be white oak, twelve inches square, with two doors and three win- dows." The jail was built on the Public Square, its site being about midway between the present Court House and "old white corner store"-now the Buckeye National Bank Cor- ner. With this location it seems that some of the citizens of the county were not well pleased, for in December of the same year, it is recorded that a petition was presented by sundry citizens praying for the removal of the jail from the Public Square in the town of Findlay. But the commissioners rejected the petition, thinking no doubt that the sight of such an institution would have a restraining effect upon the some- what wild community. It was not, however, a formidable looking structure, and that it had

neither beauty nor strength to recommend it. The prisoners used to amuse themselves by burning down the door, or removing the iron bars from the windows, and after escaping, report themselves to the sheriff, who would conduct them back to the place whence they came. But the old log jail was finally super- seded by a structure more in keeping with the wants of the county, and providing for the bet- ter security of the prisoners. (The first build- ing south of the Post Office, now owned by B. Webber), and this in its turn has since been replaced by a structure magnificent in its pro- portions, and of ample security.

Previous to the year 1831 the courts had been held in the old log schoolhouse, but now increased facilities had become necessary. The minds of the people had been prepared for a building such as was needed, and the financial condition of the county was such as to permit its erection. Whereupon the county commis- sioners at their December session in 1831, or- dered as follows :

"That advertisements be posted up in three public places, for constructing, putting up and furnishing a frame in the village of Findlay, the building to be 24 feet by 36 feet, two sto- ries high. Lower story to be nine feet in the clear, and the upper story eight and a half feet in the clear. Lower story to have a hall or entry eight feet in the clear. Lower story to have a hall or entry eight feet wide, through the center, with good partitions on either side of planed boards. The one end to be divided by a partition through the center, dividing it into equal parts. A good substantial flight of stairs to be put up in the entry. One front door, one back door to said entry, both to be of panelled doors, the front one to have four lights over it. Four twenty-light windows in front, and two back of twenty lights each in lower story, and five twenty-light windows in front in upper story and three same size back.

Digitized by Google

130

HISTORY OF HANCOCK COUNTY

Glass to be eight by ten, and well puttied in. The upper story to be ceiled with three-quarter boards, planed, tongued and grooved. A good joint shingle roof to be put on. The building to be underpinned with a good, rough stone wall, laid in lime and sand mortar, raised eighteen inches above the surface. With plain door into each room, all the doors to be hung with three-inch cast-iron butts, the lower floor to be laid out of white ash boards, not to ex- ceed six inches in width. The upper floor to be of white or blue ash boards of the same width; both floors to be tongued and grooved, and joints broken, and well nailed. The sills, posts and sleepers of the frame to be of white oak, the studding not to exceed two feet from center to center, joists same distance apart. Good sufficient locks on all the doors, and plain latches and handles. Plain eave-troughs and cornice. The front to be weather-boarded with poplar, planed, and the remainder with black walnut, rough. A washboard and chair- board upstairs and down, a plain bannistering to the stairs, together with substantial bannis- tering at the top of the stairs."

The commissioners met on the 16th day of January, 1832, the time appointed for opening the bids for the above work. Two proposals were handed in, one from Mathew Reighley for $750.00 and one from William Taylor, Frederick Henderson and Jonathan Parker for $700.00, which last bid was accepted. In June, 1833, the commissioners met and received .pro- posals for plastering the court house, when the bid of Parlee Carlin was accepted, the price, however, was not named. Whereupon, Parlee Carlin entered into a bond to lath and plaster the several rooms in the Court House in a dur- able and workmanlike manner, and complete the same by the first of the following Novem- ber. The building was erected on the south- west corner of Main and Crawford streets, the site now occupied by the Jones Building (First National Bank), and was used as a court house,

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.

Twentieth Century History of Findlay and Hancock County, Ohio, and Representative Citizens, Part 14

Author: Jacob Anthony Kimmell Publication date: 1910 Publisher: Number of Pages: 1189

Author: Jacob Anthony Kimmell
Publication date: 1910
Publisher:
Number of Pages: 1189