Jefferson County, Pennsylvania : her pioneers and people, 1800-1915, Volume I, Part 65

Author: McKnight, W. J. (William James), 1836-1918
Publication date: 1917
Publisher: Chicago : J.H. Beers
Number of Pages: 650

USA > Pennsylvania > Jefferson County > Jefferson County, Pennsylvania : her pioneers and people, 1800-1915, Volume I > Part 65

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).

We ask for speedy consideration of the subject. W. J. MCKNIGHT, GEO. W. HOOD.

The Hon. Mr. Reyburn also laid upon the table a letter from Hon. Thos. V. Cooper, the chairman of the State committee, to him, empowering him to act as the representative of the State committee, which letter was in these words :

Headquarters State Com. Phila., Oct. 4th, 1884. Hon. John E. Reyburn, Member of the Republican State Committee, 5th Senatorial District :

Dear Sir: The candidates of Indiana and Jeffer- son counties, for the Republican nomination for State senator, whose respective conferees failed to agree and adjourned sine die, have in writing sub- mitted the whole case to consideration of the State committee, agreeing over their own signatures to abide by any decision of the matter which the com- mittee may make. You are hereby appointed as the representative of the State committee with full power to adjust or settle the controversy, and your decision in the matter shall be final. The Republicans of both counties ask for immediate action, and you are re- quested to enter at once upon this commission.

Very truly yours, THOS. V. COOPER, Chairman.

And thereupon, upon reading of the said letter of submission, and letter of authorization, the said Hon. John E. Reyburn, of Philadelphia, took his seat as a member of the Senatorial conference of the 37th Senatorial district.

Upon motion of Jolin W. Books, Esq., the said Hon. J. E. Reyburn was unanimously chosen as chairman of the conference, and upon motion E. H. Moorhead, Esq., of Indiana, was chosen secretary. Upon motion the conference proceeded to the nomi- nation of a senator, and thereupon Indiana county presented the name of George W. Hood, Esq., and Jefferson county presented the name of Hon. W. J. MeKnight. Remarks were made on behalf of Mr. Hood by Hon. A. W. Kimmel, John W. Books, Esq., and E. H. Moorhead, Esq., and on behalf of Dr. MeKnight by Messrs. Cathers, Gray and Temple. E. H. Moorhead moved that the conference adjourn to seven-thirty p. m., but at the suggestion of Mr. Books the motion was withdrawn.

Mr. Moorhead suggested that the conference ad- journ until eight o'clock p. m., but the suggestion

being opposed by the conferees from Jefferson county, no motion to that effect was made.

Upon motion it was agreed to that the conference proceed to a ballot for senator, and upon the roll be- ing called, W. H. Gray voted Senator Mcknight, J. A. Cathers voted Senator McKnight and Samuel W. Temple voted Senator Mcknight. Hon. A. W. Kimmel voted George W. Hood, John W. Books voted George W. Hood and E. H. Moorhead voted George W. Hood, and Hon. J. E. Reyburn voted Senator McKnight, and upon the announcement of the vote by the secretary, the chairman announced that Senator Mcknight was the nominee of the con- ference. E. H. Moorhead thereupon moved that the nomination be made unanimous, and after the motion was put, the chairman declared that the nomination was made unanimously.

The chairman then proceeded to state at length the reasons that impelled him to cast his vote in favor of Senator Mcknight. On motion of E. H. Moor- head a vote of thanks was tendered to the Hon. J. E. Reyburn for his labor in settling and composing the conference in the 37th Senatorial district.

On motion, the conference adjourned sine die. JOHN E. REYBURN. President.

E. H. MOORHEAD,

Secretary.

It only remains for me to refer to a few of the reasons urged in behalf of the two counties com- prising the district, and which influenced my con- clusion. On behalf of Indiana it was urged:

First. That when Mr. Hood yielded four years ago, she should have the next term without opposi- tion on the part of Jefferson county ;

Second. That she, by reason of her strong Re- publican majority, was entitled to it by right ;

Third. That the nomination for Congress liad been given to Jefferson, therefore Indiana should have the senator.

These reasons were given in many forms and in great variety, but there was a constant reiteration of the same. To this Jefferson denied that such a promise was made either by Hon. W. J. McKnight, or anyone authorized to speak for her; to the second and third propositions, that the political history of the two counties showed that she had always given way to Indiana county, and that that county had been represented both in the councils of the nation and State far more than was just or demanded by reason of her greater number of Republican votes.

Thus I found the obstacles to peace and harmony were those of locality, confined entirely within cer- tain imaginary lines, and likely to occur every time there was a contest, leaving ill feeling and resent- ment to be carried into the most trivial affairs.

This had been the case for a number of years, and knowing the anxiety of the committee to arrive at some result which would look towards the prevention of these contentions, I therefore sought for a solu- tion of this and at the same time an action which would give the district an assurance of a representa- tion in some degree to commensurate with the high character and intelligence of its people.

At one of the meetings of the conferees, Jefferson had offered a resolution to settle the controversy upon the basis of two terms for her and three for Indiana, or Jefferson eight years and then Indiana twelve in succession, thus acknowledging the claims of Indiana because of her superior numbers.

As to the fitness of the two contestants, I found Mr. Hood a man of high character and attainments,

342

JEFFERSON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

fully qualified to do honor both to the district and himself.

I also found the Hon. W. J. MeKnight to be of like high character, and I listened attentively for any expression of dislike or objection to his past course in the Senate, and failed to hear even an intimation of that kind.

Finding the men in their personal characters so nearly equal, and the question one of locality, I determined to set both the men and claims of locality to one side and endeavor to decide the question for what seemed to be the best interests of the party and the good of the district. The interests of the party were, to my mind, to be better served by deciding in favor of Jefferson, upon the basis proposed by her conferees, and I think all fair-minded men will agree that when a district is represented by a man of good character, whose course upon all the questions com- ing before the highest representative body of a great Siate like ours, and whose action upon these ques- tions fails to bring forth a fault-finder, that district is best served by at least two terms, and I might be warranted in going beyond even the fixing of any limit, and so after weighing all the facts, considering all the interests with a deep sense of the grave responsibility of my position, I thought best for these reasons, to cast my vote in favor of the Hon. W. J. McKnight, the present senator, and the contestant from Jefferson.

Yours respectfully, JOHN E. REYBURN.

After the nomination was regularly and unanimously made on the 7th day of Octo- ber, A. D. 1884, Dr. McKnight received the following communication :

Indiana, Pa., October 15, 1884. Dr. W. J. Mcknight.

Dear Sir: Inasmuch as the day of election is al- most here, and in view of the action of the Republi- can county committee of this county today, and with an earnest desire for the success and harmony of the party in this Senatorial district, I desire to make you a proposition, which, I think, if adopted will solve the vexed problem. It is this: Withdraw our letter to the State committee ; let the Senatorial conference be reconvened, and permit that body to select a seventh man from an adjoining county, and to this tribunal we submit which of us shall be the candidate of the Republicans of the district. In this manner we will gain time, which is now a matter of grave necessity. If this proposition meets your approba- tion. I feel sure that it will be for the best interests of the party. As this letter will be handed to you to-morrow, may I hope for an answer not later than Friday, October 17? Awaiting a reply, and express- ing the wish for the success of our party in this district, 1 am,

Very Respectfully, GEORGE W. IlooD.

Reply of Dr. Mcknight :

Indiana, Pa., October 16, 1884. G. W. Hood, Esq.

My Dear Sir : Your letter of October 15 received. and contents noted. As I am now the regular nom- ince of the Republican party of this district for State enator, I am not at liberty to participate in any

future conferences on that subject. My duty is now to work for the success of the whole ticket. For your information as to the regularity of my nomina- tion, I enclose you a paper marked "A," which fully explains your and my final action on that subject.

Very respectfully,

W. J. MCKNIGHT.

Dr. McKnight, after the report of Senator Reyburn had been received, addressed him- self to the work of the campaign. Mr. Hood, on the other hand, determined to run as an independent candidate, relying on the large vote of Indiana to carry him through. In this he was successful. W. P. Hastings, the Dem- ocratic candidate, believing that his election was certain with two Republican candidates in the field, made but little effort, and Mr. Hood was elected by a plurality of twenty- three votes. The large Republican vote for Mr. Hood in Jefferson county was cast by the rank and file of the party to prevent the election of a Democratic senator-a result especially undesirable in view of the fact that two United States senators would be voted for by a Senator chosen at this election.

In 1888 Jefferson county presented W. C. Bond and Indiana county G. W. Hood. It was expected that Ilood would give way and Bond be the nominee. Buit lo! as usual, it was "Indiana's turn." District conferences were held without results, and to assist in harmonizing the district and bring Republican success I published the following "Plain State- ment":

"Mr. Editor: Whereas George W. Hood and others asserted in conversation, and pub- lished in 1884 in the Republican papers of this Senatorial district, that I had agreed in 1880 to yield the senatorial nomination to him in 1884, and that I was under a moral obliga- tion to do so, and that in refusing to yield the nomination to him in 1884 I was violating oral pledges and the principles of honor: and whereas hundreds of good and true Repub- licans, both in Indiana and Jefferson counties, were deceived bry said false assertions and un- truthful statements ; and whereas said charges and accusations have been made to me in per- son within the last few days by individuals claiming to be friends of Hood; and whereas I have never taken the notice of these base and false accusations that I should, therefore I now publicly denounce all such charges as ma- liciously false and groundless, and that the Republicans of this Senatorial district may know the truth I herewith publish a statement signed by five of the six conferces of our Senatorial conference in 1880 (the sixth mem-

343

JEFFERSON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

- ber of that conference being dead), who give their own version of this matter as follows, viz. :

".We, the undersigned conferees of Jef- ferson county in the Senatorial struggle of ISSO. between G. W. Hood, of Indiana, and Dr. McKnight, of Jefferson, desiring that the truth may be fully and impartially known. and that right and truth may always prevail. do now, in the interest of justice, honesty and fairness, earnestly, candidly and cheerfully state that no arrangement, to our knowledge, implied or otherwise, was made in 1880, by, through or with the conferees of Indiana county, that could give Mr. Hood any claim to the nomination for senator in 1884.

" 'That no arrangement, to our knowledge, implied or otherwise, was made in 1880, by, through or between G. W. Hood and Dr. Mc- Knight, that would in 1884 entitle Mr. Hood to the nomination for senator.

"'That no arrangement to our knowledge, implied or otherwise, was made in 1880, by, through or with General Negley, that would

entitle Mr. Hood to the nomination for sen- ator in 1884.

" 'That no arrangement, to our knowledge, understanding or agreement, was made in 1880, in any wise, shape or form, between the conferees, between the candidates, by, through or with General Negley, that could in the least invalidate the claims of Jefferson county to the senator in 1884.

".R. S. HUNT, " 'JOSEPHI HENDERSON, "'JOHN J. THOMPSON, "'Conferees of Jefferson County. """The above statement is true and correct. "'A. J. T. CRAWFORD, "'W. C. GORDON, "'Conferees of Indiana County.' "Yours, etc., "W. J. MCKNIGHT. "Brookville, Pa .. October 16, 1888."

Mr. Bond and Mr. Hood continued in the field, and the result in 1888 was the election of Hannibal K. Sloan, a Democrat.

CHAPTER XX

FINANCIAL

COINAGE AND PAPER MONEY-PIONEER CURRENCY-MONEY FROM 1850 TO 1860-HARD TIMES OF 1857-PRICE OF GOLD DURING CIVIL WAR-WAR STAMPS OF 1862-BANKS AND BANKING - JEFFERSON COUNTY BANKS-FINANCIAL CONDITIONS IN THE UNITED STATES TO-DAY

COINAGE AND PAPER MONEY

The first coins were struck in brass about 1184 B. C., and in gold and silver by Pheidon, Tyrant of Argos, about 862 B. C.

Paper money was first used in 1484.

The first paper money in the Province of Pennsylvania was issued in 1773.

The subject of a national mint for the United States was first introduced by Robert Morris, the patriot and financier of the Rev- olution. As head of the finance department. Mr. Morris was instructed by Congress to prepare a report on the foreign coins then in circulation in the United States. On the 15th of January, 1782, he laid before Congress an exposition of the whole subject. Accompany- ing this report was a plan for American coin- age. But it was mainly through his efforts. in connection with Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, that a mint was estab-

lished in the early history of the union of the States. On the 15th of April, 1790, Congress instructed the secretary of the treasury, Alex- ander Hamilton, to prepare and report a proper plan for the establishment of a national mint, and Mr. Hamilton presented his report at the next session. An act was framed providing for the establishing of the mint, which finally passed both Houses, and received President Washington's approval April 2, 1792.

The pioneer building erected in the United States for public use under the authority of the federal government was a structure for the United States mint. This was a plain brick edifice, on the east side of Seventh street. near Arch, in Philadelphia, Pa., the corner- stone of which was laid by David Ritten- house, director of the mint, on July 31, 1792. In the following October operations of coin- ing commenced. This building was occupied for about forty years. On the 19th of May,

344

JEFFERSON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

1820, an act was passed by Congress locating the United States mint on its present site.

The first metal purchased for coinage was six pounds of old copper at one shilling and three pence per pound, which was coined and delivered to the treasurer in 1792.

The pioneer coinage of the United States consisted of silver half dimes, issued in Octo- ber. 1792, of which Washington makes men- tion in his address to Congress, on November 6. 1792, as follows: "There has been a small beginning in the coinage of half dimes, the want of small coins in circulation calling the first attention to them."

The first deposit of silver bullion was made on July 18, 1794, by the Bank of Maryland. It consisted of coins of France, amounting to eighty thousand seven hundred and fifty dol- lars and seventy-three and a half cents. The first return of silver coins to the treasurer was made on October 15. 1704. All, or about all, of our silver money was coined first in 1796. The silver ten-cent piece weighed forty-one grains, and the five-cent piece weighed twenty grains.

The first deposit of gold bullion for coin- age was made by Moses Brown, merchant, of Boston, on February 12, 1705; it was of gold ingots, worth two thousand two hundred and seventy-six dollars and seventy-two cents, which was paid for in silver coins. The pioneer return of gold coinage took place on July 31, 1795, and consisted of seven hundred and forty-four half eagles. The first delivery of eagles was on September 22d, same year, and consisted of four hundred pieces.

The present system of the coins is formed upon the principles laid down in the resolution of Congress in 1786. In the act of 1792 it was declared that the money of account be expressed in dollars (the dollar to be the unit ), dimes or tenths, cents or hundredths. and mills or thousandths of a dollar, and that all accounts in public offices or proceedings in the courts of the United States be kept in con- formity with this regulation. Nothing can be more simple or convenient than this decimal subdivision. The terms are proper because they express the proportions which they are intended to designate. The dollar was wisely chosen, as it corresponded with the Spanish coin, with which we had been long familiar.

The mills were imaginary and never coined. The big, old-fashioned cents were made of cop- per, round, and about one inch in diameter and one-sixth of an inch in thickness. They weighed two hundred and sixty-four grains. and the copper half cent weighed one hundred

and thirty-two grains. These were issued until 1857, when the law was enacted creating the nickel cent.

Our Government has given us, at different times, the following five minor coins: Half cent, coined 1793, stopped 1857 ; one cent, first coined 1796, still in uise: two cents, coined 1864, stopped 1872; three cents, coined 1865, stopped 1889; and the five-cent piece. We have now only two minor coins, the one-cent and five-cent pieces. Six denominations of gold have been coined, but only four are now isstted.

For sixty-one years we had free coinage in the United States of gold and silver. Anyone could take gold and silver to the mint and get it coined free of charge, but in 1853 this free coinage was stopped by an act of Con- gress. While the government realizes enor- mous profits from the manufacture of money. it does not and will not redeem the counter- feits which fall into the hands of the people. Its vast profits might well, if necessary, be expended in giving absolute security to the money which it makes for the people.

In March, 1865. Congress authorized the motto, "In God We Trust," to be placed on our coins. This was highly commendable and desirable. During President Roosevelt's ad- ministration the motto was ordered off, but the next Congress enacted a law restoring it.

Since the foundation of the government $17.792.528,807.91 in currency has been put in circulation. Of this great sum $15.905,864,- 447.18 had been redeemed at the end of the fiscal year June 30, 1911. Money lost by fire. flood, shipwreck ; buried and forgotten ; hidden and never to be discovered because those who hid it have passed away, and money lost in various other ways, all goes to swell Uncle Sam's profits.

During the Civil war the treasury depart- ment issued $368.724,079.45 in fractional cur- rency, notes ranging from three cents to fifty cents. Though practically half a century has elapsed since the issues, $15.233.329.26 of these fractions of a dollar have never been presented to the treasury, and so small have the redemp- tions been in recent years, that of 1911 having been only $1.431.35, that treasury officials are now calculating on retaining at least fifteen million dollars from this single issuc.

Specie payments were suspended January I, 1862; resumed January 1, 1879.

Up to 1860 the business of the country was carried on by a currency of State banks, orders, and county orders, and the more you had of this money sometimes the poorer you were.

.- X

IONS

TEN SHILLINGS,

According to the RESOLVES of the As- [ /)///T JSEMULY

.. of, Penn-

R Sylvania,

of the

18th Day

"of Na-

Ssixteenth

Ver of

the Reign

Mistety

GEORGE

tou at Philadel- this, the Rth Day of Drember, 1775. TEN SHILL. A

: Por Reiman

liblarh 100

TEN SHILLINGS

Printed by HALL and

SELLERS. 1775

Two Shillings Es Six pence

NE: 11096

A CROW

345

JEFFERSON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

State banks, which were chartered before the adoption of the Federal Constitution, were up to June 3, 1864, furnishing the principal part of the paper circulation of the country. The government took over the function of making paper money in the sixties, after the people had suffered enormous monetary losses through the counterfeiting rampant in the old days of State banks and wildcat currency. The very first issues by the federal government were a distinct improvement, artistically and mechanically, over the State bank currency. The standard of excellence continually im- proved with the passing of the years until within a very recent time, when deteriorating reformers began their attacks on the excel- lence of our currency. ( See also Banks and Banking in this chapter.)

PIONEER CURRENCY

The pioneer merchants when going to Phil- adelphia for goods put their silver Spanish dollars in belts, in undershirts, or anywhere on their persons where they thought it could be best concealed. They made their journeys on horseback, and every horseback rider (tourist ) carried a pair of leather saddlebags.

Fifty years ago every merchant in Brook- ville was forced, as a matter of protection, to subscribe for and receive a "Bank Note De- tector," a publication revised and issued monthly or weekly. The weeklies cost two dol- lars and fifty cents a year. These periodicals gave a weekly report of all broken banks, the discount on all good bank notes, par value of all State paper money, as well as points for the detection of counterfeit notes and coin. Even then the business man could not be sure that the notes he accepted would not be pro- nounced worthless by the next mail, for there was hardly a week without a bank failure, and nearly every man had bills of broken banks in his possession. To add to the perplexities of the situation, there were innumerable counter- feits which could with difficulty be distin- guished from the genuine. Granting that the bank was good, and that the discount was properly figured, there was no assurance that the bill was what it purported to be. The best currency of those times was New York bank- notes, and the poorest those of the Western banks. There was a discount on all notes, ranging from one to twenty per cent. It was for the interest of the private bankers to cir- culate the notes on which there was the largest discount, and as a consequence the country was flooded with bills of banks, the locations

of which were hardly known. All this was a terrible annoyance and loss to the people, but it was a regular bonanza to the "shaving shops." Even of the uncertain bank-notes there was not enough to do the business of the community. Most of the buying and sell- ing was done on long credit, and occasionally a manufacturing firm, to ease itself along and relieve the necessities of the public, would issue a mongrel coin, which went by the name of "pewterinctum."

The "bank-note detectors" had a depart- ment showing wood-cut pictures of all the foreign and native silver and gold coins, and also gave the value of each. This was neces- sary, inasmuch as our silver currency, even as late as the fifties, was still largely foreign. The different States fixed the value of this foreign currency each for its own locality. For example, in New York eight shillings made a dollar, but in Pennsylvania seven shill- lings and sixpence mnade a dollar.

Previous to the passage of the law by the federal government for regulating the coins of the United States much perplexity arose from the use of no less than four different currencies or rates at which one species of coin was recoined, in the different parts of the Union. Thus, in New Hampshire, Massachu- setts, Maine, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Ver- mont. Virginia and Kentucky the dollar was recoined at six shillings; in New York and North Carolina, at eight shillings ; in New Jer- sey, Pennsylvania and Maryland, at seven shil- lings and sixpence : in Georgia and South Car- olina, at four shillings and eightpence. The subject had engaged the attention of the Con- gress of the old Confederation.

When money was scarce merchants were compelled to sell their goods on credit, and principally for barter. There were two prices. for cash and credit. The commodities that were exchanged for in our stores were boards, shingles, square timber, wheat, rye, buck- wheat. flax seed, clover seed, timothy seed, wool, rags, beeswax, feathers, hickory nuts, chestnuts, hides, deer pelts, elderberries, furs, road orders, school and county orders, eggs. butter, tow cloth, linen cloth, ax handles, raft- ing bows and pins, rafting grubs, maple sugar in the spring, and oats after harvest. Every- thing is done on a cash basis now.

MONEY FROM 1850 TO 1860-HARD TIMES OF 1857

In 1859 the merchants of Jefferson county signed an agreement and advertised in our

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.

Jefferson County, Pennsylvania : her pioneers and people, 1800-1915, Volume I, Part 65

Author: McKnight, W. J. (William James), 1836-1918 Publication date: 1917 Publisher: Chicago : J.H. Beers Number of Pages: 650

Author: McKnight, W. J. (William James), 1836-1918
Publication date: 1917
Publisher: Chicago : J.H. Beers
Number of Pages: 650