Adams County, Nebraska - Chapter 4: Couxty Seat Re^moval, 1916

Chapter 4: Couxty Seat Re^moval

Juniata became the seat of government of Adams County by the vote of tlie people cast at the first election held in the county. The date of this election was December 12, 1871, and the home of Titus Babcock at Juniata was the polling place. Of the twenty-nine votes cast, Juniata received twenty-eight. One vote was cast for Kingston. Kingston was a homestead near the Little Blue and the inhabitants of the southern part of the county entertained hope of establishing a to\m there. Kingston did not develop beyond the small general merchandise store which flourished for a number of years. It is possible, however, that it would have received more votes at the first election were it not that a number of voters from that section were not allowed to cast their ballot, on the ground that they had failed to register. There is no doubt, however, that in any event Jimiata would have polled the larger vote.

It should be remembered that at the time of this election there Avas no railroad in Adams County. The Burlington was extending its line westward from Plattsmouth, but for the moment it was not at all preposterous for any community or homestead to hope for a location favorable to a townsite. The vote for Kingston shows that at even so early a date as that of the first election there was lack of mianimity as to the location of the county seat, and this only augm-ed the long and in some respects bitter stniggle that was to follow. The contenders in that struggle were Hastings and Jimiata.

There is nothing to indicate that when Walter ]Mickleni, on October 1, 1872, began surveying his homestead into a townsite that composed the original Town of Hastings, he had any thought that the town that might develop from the nucleus composed of the three or four business houses then in operation would one day contend against Juniata for the already established coimty seat. INIr. INIicklem's reason for surveying a townsite is to be found in the building of the St. Joseph & Denver, now St. Joseph & Grand Island, Railroad, into Hastings. ]Mr. INIicklem might reasonably expect that at the junction of this road with the Burlington a thriving town might gro^v. The St. Josej^h & Denver was completed into Hastings during September, 1872.

It was the intention of the builders of the latter road to extend their line to Denver. It was lack of funds to carry out that project that led them to abandon it. It was on April 17, 1872, that E. E. Brown, representing the St. Joseph & Denver road, appeared before tlie Adams Coxmty commissioners at Juniata and asked them to provide $75,000 in county bonds for the assistance of his railroad. He l^romised that if the bonds asked for should carry, the road would complete twenty-five miles of its line in Adams County by January 1, 1873. The commissioners, S. L. Brass, Edwin M. Allen and Wellington W. Selleck, responded by ordering a special election for jMay 27th. At the election the bonds did not carry, and it is probable that the failure of the bonds to carry was the principal reason why Juniata ultimately lost the county seat; at least the issue of the electif)n was one of the prime factors. But a munber of the leaders in Juniata argued, and with seeming plausibility, that the St. Joseph & Denver woidd come to the county without the voting of bonds, inasmuch as Adams County lay in tlie })ath of the proposed route, and there was no doubt in their minds that it would clioose for business reasons to cross the Bin-lington at Juniata, which was already a promising village and the county seat. Without bonds the new road did entei- Adams County, but it crossed the Biu'lington not at Juniata liut at Hastings. No doubt the activity of Jmiiata pioneers in defeating the bonds influenced the St. Joseph to avoid the youngcounty seat and to enter Hastings. Having acquired two railroads, Hastings naturally felt the stirrings of ambition. To foster this feeling there Avas also the fact that voters in the southern and central portions of the county had not been favorable to Juniata in the first election.

This feeling was crystallized in many conversations on the streets of Hastings and in the few business houses. On the 24.th of INIay, 1873, the Hastings Journal was issued from the press, and thenceforth the ambition of Hastings was assisted by the printed word. This paper was published by "SI. K. Lewis and A. 1j. Wigton and was active in seeking the submission of the question of tlie removal of the county seat to a vote of the people.

IjCss than a month after the founding of the Hastings Joiu-nal, on June 3, 1873, a mass meeting was held in Hastings to consider plans for the removal of the county seat. This meeting resulted in the formulating of a machine well organized to carry out the work in prospect. The motion of Samuel Alexander providing for a committee of ten to canvass each precinct in behalf of Hastings was carried. The workers were assigned as follows: For Denver Precinct, Thomas E. Farrell and R. V. Shockey; for Little Blue, G. W. Donahey and A. Berg; for Silver Lake, C. K. Lawson and Charles Kohl; for Kenesaw, A. D. Yocum and Charles H. Paul; for Juniata, B. H. Brown and S. S. Dow. The committee named at this meeting worked with a will. They visited the homesteaders at their homes, buttonholed them when they came to town and industriously labored setting forth the advantages of Hastings, with its two railroads, as the location for the county seat. ISIeanwhile the inhabitants of Juniata were just as zealous. Among the leaders of Juniata's defenders were the county commissioners, James Laird, A. H. Bowen, B. F. Smith, A. V. Cole, W. B. Thorne and several others. The spirit of wai- was rife among the contenders and sometimes disputes became so heated that blows resulted.

I^ess than a month following the mass meeting which had been held at Hastings and which was presided over by j\L K. Lewis, with J. 31. Abliott secretary, the work of the committee of ten showed results, for on July 1st a petition praying for the submission of the question of the removal of the county seat from Juniata was filed with the county commissioners. This petition was filed by Simon Rankins, a business man of Hastings, and was signed by him and a large nmnber of other citizens. For the time being the petition was laid upon the table and the defenders of Juniata planned their next moves against the assaults of an enemy which showed all the signs of persistence and determination.

The petition remained upon the table until August 'iOth, when it was taken up and a remonstrance against the submission of the removal question to a ballot was filed by William Gardner, C. H. Chapman and 200 others. On the afternoon of that day, while the August sun shone in real Nebraska streng-th upon the little public l)uilding in the prairie towni, arguments were heard by the commissioners for the petition and for the remonstrance. A large number of Hastings residents and partisans were present, and the Juniata synqjathizers were out in force, so that the little room where the commissioners deliberated could not begin to accommodate the crowd, many of whom braved the blazing rays and congregated about the door. Hastings was represented in the argument chiefly liy R. A. Batty and A. W. Wheeler. The principal spokesmen for Juniata were James Laird and A. H. Bowen. Not all the arguments, however, were witliin the building. Outside the contending partisans kept

Tlie arguments hefore the commissioners began at 2 o'clock and were kept up continuously until 6.30, when the meeting adjourned for an hour. After suj^i^er the discussion was resumed. Immediately after sui^per JMr. Batty requested that the commissioners postpone their decision until the following Friday and that in the meantime they should receive further petitions for and against. This was on Wednesday evening. The commissioners, however, refused ]Mr. Batty's request and ordered that the time for receiving and filing jjetitions be declared closed, and that the board take until August 28th to decide the question. On that date the commissioners rendered their decision in favor of the remonstrance and did not order an election. The ground upon which they rendered their decision was that the statute required that the petition be signed by two-thirds of the legal voters of the county. The remonstrance showed, it was contended, that the i:)etition did not have the required nmnber of voters. Thus did Hastings lose the first skirmish before the Adams County commissioners.

This defeat, however, by no means lessened the ardor of the Hastings partisans, and the work systematically begim by the committee of ten was jjressed on with vigor. In the fall election of 1873 A. H. Cramer was elected county clerk and in the subsequent developments this election of ]\Ir. Cramer proved to be an important factor.

The next activity of moment in the removal contest began in the forenoon of June 19, 1874. The county commissioners were in session and A. H. Bowen appeared before the board and presented a resolution for their consideration. ]Mr. Bowen was asked to read the resolution, which was signed by E. M. Allen, B. F. Smith and A. H. Bowen. The resolution set forth that a large number of taxpayers had met at Jimiata ^Monday, June l.jth, and decided that the time was ripe for the erection of a courthouse at Juniata. The resolution asked that the $13,000 as shown by the levy of 1873 should be transferred by the commissioners from the sinking fund to the courthouse fund and that they should at once let the contract for the erection of the building. The resolution also stipulated that the proposed courthouse was to cost not less than $1.5,000 nor more than $25,000. This sudden move for the erection of the courthouse was the plan developed and adopted by the leaders of the Juniata partisans for the securing of the county seat already theirs, and for quelling the agitation for removal. This plan was developed without the knowledge of the Hastings partisans. It was Juniata's answer to

Past And Present Of Adajms Countt 45

^Vhen the resolution was presented by JNIr. Bowen no Hastings jjartisan was present excej^t the county clerk, Mr. A. H. Cramer. Before deliberations had proceeded very far, however, the county clerk espied Charles H. Paul, who happened to come to Juniata that day. ]Mr. Pavd had ridden a horse to town. JNIr. Cramer succeeded in slipping the Avord to jMr. Paul that something direful to the hopes of Hastings was pending before the board, and he urged him to return at once to Hastings to warn the people as to what was about to transpiie. ]Mr. Paul at once turned the head of his steed and raced I)ack to Hastings with a speed and a sj^irit somewhat akin to those of Paul Revere upon a previous momentous occasion. For a time the commissioners discussed the feasibility of the plan set forth by the resolution : that is, to transfer $13,000 from the sinking fund to the courthouse fund. The county clerk protested, declaring that the commissioners were not warranted by law to make the transfer.

Commissioner Langley then moved that the commissioners hold tliemselves in readiness to receive plans, specifications and bids for a courthouse to cost not more than $1.5,000. When this motion had been carried, Conmiissioner Brass moved that the sheriff notify ai-chitects, contractors and builders to prepare their plans, specifications and bids "by 10 o'clock this day."

Shortly after this action was taken, hoofbeats were heard upon the ])rairie road to the east. Hastings had rallied her forces upon receipt of the message carried by INIr. Paul. They came in wagons, on horses, ou whatever conveyances they could muster, and if memories may be relied upon through the forty-two years elapsed since that event, some brought shotguns, revolvei's and other weapons with which to defend Avhat they considered to be their rights. Fortunately, these weajDons were not brought into play and no crime mars the intense feelings which the occasion engendered.

Throughout the presentation of the arg\iments and the threats of tlie folks from Hastings, the commissioners remained unswerved f]'om tlieir determination. In the afternoon, however, they extended the time for the bids, plans and specifications to be filed by 10 o'clock the following day. Hastings lost no time in preparing a remonstrance against the erection of the courthouse. When the commissioners met the next day the remonstrance, signed by Frank Sears and eightyeight Qthers, was filed. It was evident that the commissioners did not propose that much time should be lost in parleying. Chairman Selleck kept the machinery of deliberation moving rapidly. A time limit of ten minutes was placed upon the speakers for each side. The dehate was acrimonious, led largely bj^ JNlr. Batty for Hastings and James Laird for Juniata. It was quite evident, too, that the speaking was not going to convince anyone not already convinced.

On the motion of JMr. Brass the commissioners jiroceeded to open the bids. The bid of R. D. Babcock was for $18,000, for which he proposed to erect a courthouse "similar to the one at Lowell, county seat of Kearney County." The bid was rejected.

The bid of D. H. Freeman of Juniata was accej^ted. The specifications filed with ]\Ir. Freeman's bid designated a building 40 by 46. It was to be erected for $14,000. ]Mr. Freeman asked that he should be paid in cash, or he would agree to take county warrants at 7-5 cents on the dollar. He also agreed to add an approved belfry.

Following the acceptance of Freeman's bid. Commissioner Brass made a motion that the levy in the sinking fund should be borrowed for the use of the general fund to apply to tlie contract witli Freeman. The motion was carried. The next motion carried ordered that tlie clerk draw warrants on the general fund in the amount of $10,000 in favor of D. H. Freeman.

A. H. Cramer, who it will l)e remembered was the county clerk, again protested that the action just taken by the board of commissioners was irregular and unlawful. The board reminded Mr. Cramer tliat his duty was merely clerical. The debate between Mr. Cramer and the commissioners was heated, ]Mr. Cramer, however, steadfastly refusing to place the official seal of Adams County upon the warrants, feeling the while that probably he was exceeding his legal authority, but also quite sure that the action of the commissioners was irregular. Finally, exasperated by the obstinacy of the clerk, the commissioners carried a motion declaring the office of county clerk of Adams County to be vacant.

Mr. Cramer again contended that the latter action, too, was irregidar, and that his office could not be thus vacated on the grounds taken by the commissioners. In consequence he refused to give up the keys or the official seal of the county. The commissioners then carried a motion providing that the matter of the authority of the commissioners for the letting of a contract for the purpose of erecting a courthouse be referred to Judge Gantt in chambers at Nebraska City, June 30, 1874. Tlie judge's action was to issue a restraining order forbidding the erection of the courthouse under the Freeman contract. No further effort was made to oust ]Mr. Cramer from office.

removal contest. While the legality of the action of the coniniissioners in letting the Freeman contract was still in doubt, reposing in the hands of Judge Gantt in Nebraska City, a mass meeting, or more correctly, an indignation meeting of Hastings partisans was held at Juniata. This was on June 24, 1874. A rejjort emphatically condemning the commissioners and heartily endorsing the action of Mr. Cramer in refusing to issue the warrants was adopted with an overwhelming majority. The resolutions of condemnation and commendation were drafted by J. M. Ragan, W. M. West, Oliver ^Vhitson, A. C. Moore and J. C. Wilson. R. A. Batty was the presiding officer at this meeting.

For a few weeks following the close of the phase of the county seat war just narrated aff'airs remained in status quo so far as overt activities were concerned. The jjot was still simmering, however, and the Hastings workers felt that tlie failure of the Freeman courthouse contract project had won sympathy for their side and they were doubly desirous that the question of removal be submitted to a vote. Conmiittees were active in securing signers for a petition looking to that end. The result of this activity was the filing of a petition with the board of commissioners by A. D. Yocum and others asking that the matter of relocation be submitted to a vote at the forthcoming fall election. The commissioners were in no hurry to act. ]Mr. Yocum had filed the petition August 17, 1874. No action had been taken by the conunissioners on September 7th, and on that day the ^vorkers for Hastings filed the names of thirty-three additional signers to the petition and urged the board to take some action. A remonstrance was also filed that day, signed by 392 remonstrators. There were 584 signers of the petition for submission of the question.

Next day, September 8th, the commissioners took action, denying the petition and refusing to order that the question be voted upon. The statute go^'erning the submission of the question of removal provided that two-thirds of the qualified voters at the last general election must sign tlie petition before the commissioners should order a vote to be taken. The officials explained that the petition filed by iMr. Yocum did not contain the required number of signers. They said that to the best of their belief there were in the comity 978 persons who claimed to be legal voters. While it was true that the total signers of the petition and the remonstrance amounted to 976, two fewer than the number of qiialified voters in the county, yet there had been presented to them the names of forty-six jJersons who had signed neither the petition nor the remonstrance. The addition of these names to tliose already filed would bring the total of the qualified voters in tlie county up to 1,022, a number wliich the officials contended was absurdly high. JNIoreover, they declared that forty-four of those who had signed the petition for submission had subsequently petitioned to have their names erased. Under these circumstances, the board declared that the jietition could not be rightfully granted.

The following year, 187.>, however, from the very outset seemed more hopeful to Hastings. In the November election, 1874, Hastings gained a friend on the board, in the jierson of A. D. Yocum, who was an energetic worker. Mr. Yocum succeeded Mr. Brass Januar}' 1, 1875, and in the passing of the latter from the board Juniata lost a strong and enthusiastic advocate. By an act of the Nebraska Legislature approved February 24, 1875, it was provided that "Whenever the inhabitants of a county are desirous of changing the county seat an election must be ordered if the petitioners number three-fifths of all tlie votes cast at the last general election." Before this act was passed it was necessary that three-fourths of tlie electors should petition.

Once more the Hastings partisans began their struggle to get the question of relocation submitted, and on JNIarch 5th, J. L. Parrott filed a i^etition signed by himself and 491 otliers. The petition was granted and the board ordered that a special election should be held on the first Tuesday in April, 1875. Tlie pi'oclamations posted jirovided for the following polling places: Juniata Precinct, courthouse, Juniata; Denver Precinct, office of L. C. Gould, Hastings; Little Blue Precinct, schoolhouse, District No. 19; Kenesaw Precinct, schoolhouse, District No. 3; Cottonwood Precinct, house of E. C. Sheelhamer.

On A])ril 8th the ballots were canvassed by a canvassing board composed of A. H. Cramer, M. K. Lewis and jNIyron Van Fleet. The canvassers declared that Hastings had won the election. The county clerk, A. H. Cramer, directed by the canvassers, so entered the result uiJon the record. The canvassers of the votes by this board sliowed the result to be as folloAvs:

Precinct because affidavits were filed by two Adams County electors stating that the polls in Cottonwood Precinct were declared open before a full election board was organized, and ad j omened the same to place other than the place designated by the j)roclamation of election, and further that the election board did not qualify before the proj^er officer as provided by law. After throwing out the Cottonwood returns the vote stood: For Jimiata, 352; for Hastings, ool; for Lenata, 1. By this reckoning 904 ballots were cast at the election. Three-fifths of tliat total would equal .5-12 2-5 votes. So that Hastings, having received 551 votes, was entitled to tlie county seat, the law requiring for the removal a majority of three-fifths of the votes cast. This is the reasoning underlying the entry in the record of elections which gives Hastings the victory in the contest of 1875. The recorded for Lenata, was probably intended for Juniata, but tlie writing was almost illegible and under the stress of opposition it was agreed as a compromise that the vote was for Lenata, though no one knew of a place by that name.

Juniata, however, did not remain quiescent following the finding of the canvassing board. Affidavit after affidavit was filed. It was charged that there was an irregularity in the organization of the county and that many of the election officials and a few of tlie county officials were not citizens of the United States. It was alleged further that thirty legal voters had been disfranchised because they would not vote for Juniata. This latter charge, of course, was made by Hastings ]:)artisans. Juniata supporters charged tliat in the southern townships of the county the only notices of election had been posted in S])ring Ranch in Clay County. Juniata, however, exercised the greatest effort to have the vote recanvassed and to secure the including of the returns from Cottonwood Township.

And in this Juniata was successful. The Supreme Court issued an order compelling the board of canvassers to count the votes from Cottonwood. On ]May 19th the vote was recanvassed, the board at this time being comjiosed of A. H. Cramer, George W. Wolcott and W. H. Burr. Cottonwood gave Juniata twenty-eight additional votes and only ten to Hastings. One vote from Silver Lake previously counted for Hastings was now counted for Juniata, and one less for Hastings was counted in Denver Precinct. According to this canvass, Juniata had received 381 votes and Hastings 559. The commissioners declared that Juniata had received more than two-fifths of all the votes cast, and was therefore the county seat, and the result was so recorded in the records.

election of 1875, there was no disposition on the part of the workers to give u]) the contest. The Hastings Jonrnal continued to agitate the question and plans for the next campaign were considered without diminution of enthusiasm. Upon IVIarch 5, 1877, Hastings began what proved to be the final assault upon Juniata. On that date there was filed with the county commissioners a petition containing 635 signers, comijosed of the resident electors of Adams County, praying that the question of removal of the county seat be again submitted to a vote. Tliis time the board took immediate action, and on the same date Commissioner Moore moved that the petition be granted. The motion was seconded by Commissioner John R. Ratcliff and was carried. A special election was ordered to be held INIonday, April 9, 1877. The following were designated as the polling places: West Blue Precinct, schoolhouse. District No. 33; Denver Precinct, office of George F. Work, Hastings; Pawnee Precinct, schoolhouse. District No. 22; Little Blue Precinct, schoolhouse. District No. 9: Silver Lake Pi'ecinct, residence of W. B. Thorne; Cottonwood Precinct, schoolhouse. District No. 39; Kenesaw Precinct, schoolhouse. District N^o. 3; Juniata Precinct, courthouse, Juniata.

On Ajjril 14th the county clerk, A. H. Cramer, selected Thomas R. Lee and Thomas D. Scofield to act with himself as a canvassing board to canvass the votes. The canvassers foimd that 844 votes had been cast for Hastings and 535 for Juniata. The votes for Hastings numbering more than three-fifths of all the votes cast, it was declared to be the county seat. The abstract of the canvassers shows the vote by precincts to have been as follows :

Vote On Relocation, 1877

Though the report of the canvassing board showed that Hastings had won the county seat by the ballot, Juniata was not disposed to yield thus easily, and there followed a period of litigation which extended until the autumn of 1878.

On the day that the canvassing board announced their finding, April 14, 1877, Adna H. Bowen, "for himself and others similarly interested," filed a petition, affidavit and undertaking in the District Court asking the court to issue an injimction to prevent the removal of the countv offices to Hastings. The countv commissioners, A. D.

Yocuni, Edward jMoore and John RatclifF, and the county clerk, A. H. Cramer, were made the defendants. A temporary injunction was granted, and Jiniiata was saved from immediate loss of the county offices. The plaintiffs charged that frauds had been perpetrated in the election, that votes had been illegally coimted for Hastings, and that the partisans of the latter town had used intimidation to prevent voters from expressing their wishes at the jjolls.

On June 8th the defendants moved the court for the dissolution of the injunction. T. D. Scolield and E. E. Brown represented Hastings, while James Laird and Oliver P. INIason, defending Jimiata, argued against defendants' motion. Judge Gas! in ovenided the motion of the defendants and the injunction continued in force. On the same date the plaintiffs were allowed to file an amended petition.

On July 6, 1877, Judge Gaslin, with the consent of both imrties to the controversy, ajjpointed C. E. Calkins, an attorney from Kearney, as referee to take proofs and report issues of law and fact and to report without unnecessary delay. July 18th, the referee filed his oath and forthwith began his inquiry into the fact of the election held the previous April. These sessions of inquiry were begun in the courthouse at Juniata. In form the inquiry was much like a court ])roceeding. A long list of witnesses Avere examined and the testimony was a conflicting maze of charges and counter-charges. Several hearings were had by the referee in Hastings, in iSIillet Hall, vvhicli was located on First Street, on the north side of the street and a little east of the corner of Hastings Avenue and First Street. The referee did not finish his investigation, begun in July, until the following December. On the .3d of that month he filed his report, and the next day the defendants filed a motion for judgment on the report of the referee and the court set the motion for hearing on the morning of Friday, December 7th. The compensation asked by the referee for his services was $320 and $77 for expenses, and he asked for the stenographer, John W. Brewster, for the transcript furnished by him, the sum of $400. By consent of both parties later, the reporter, ISIr. Brewster, was allowed $203 additional and per diem attendance before the referee.

On the morning of December 7th, Judge Gaslin took uji the motion for judgment on the report of the referee and took the report under advisement. On the daj^ before, Mr. Bowen filed a motion for a new trial.

In order to more thoroughly familiarize himself with the merits of the controversy. Judge Gaslin took with him to Kearney the papers filed in the case and the report of the referee. On the night of

February 26, 1878, the office in which these jmpers were stored at Kearney was destroyed by fire, and with it the papers concerning the momentous issue in Adams County. Among the papers lost was the ]-eport of the referee. It is the recollection, however, of some of those who took part in the controversy that the lead of Hastings over Juniata was increased by the rej^ort, and that it was found that ballots were cast illegally in both places, but that a greater number were so cast in Juniata than in Hastings.

The loss of the records of the hearings before Referee Calkins threw a degree of consternation into both camps. On July 10th, however. Judge Gaslin overruled the motion of Oliver P. Mason, acting for Juniata, for a new trial before a referee. He, however, allowed the jjlaintiff's motion asking leave to supply all such papers as were of record in the case and which could be had from the notes and records of the shorthand rej^orter, and to retake certain depositions. Among the depositions to be taken were those of A. W. Devore, M. B. Noel, William Stine, David Sisk, Frank Blodgett, D. F. Brown, A. S. Hill, William Linton, J. B. Dinsmore, Art Davidson, Hiram Carpenter, J. W. Carpenter, John Wallichs, Conrad Benzel, Philip Bergeron, Sr., the minister of the Russian settlement at AVilliamsburg, in Franklin County, and those of twentyone others. Plaintiffs were ordered by the court to file all depositions and other papers "with the clerk of the court on or before September 16th. The following day argTiments were heard on the motion of the defendants to dissolve the injunction and the motion was overruled. At this time the defendants, the Adams County commissioners and A. H. Cramer, were represented by Ash & Scofield.

On Sejjtember 27, 1878, the county seat contest came uj) for the last time in the District Court. The motion of the defendants to substitute copies for the original pajiers which had been destroyed by fire was allowed. These papers were copies of the affidavit for injvmction, the original petition, the order allowing the injunction, the undertaking upon which the injunction was allowed, the amended petition, the answer and reply and the report of the referee. In the ruling. Judge Gaslin said that tlie plaintiffs had neglected to file copies of original papers as the court had ordered them on July 10th.

The court then passed upon the motion of the defendants to confirm the report of tlie referee, filed December 3d of the previous year. The next words of Judge Gaslin announced the final victory of Hastings in the legal contest which had lasted from April 14, 1877, to September 27, 1878. These were the momentous words: "It appearing to the court that all the papers herein and all the evidence taken and jjroceedings had before the referee have been consumed by fire, and that they cannot all be supplied by copies or otherwise, and the coin-t being fully advised in the premises, it is ordered that the injunction heretofore issued in this cause be and the same is hereby dissolved without prejudice, and that each party pay their own costs." It was about 3 o'clock in the afternoon when Judge Gaslin dissolved the injunction. A little after, 4 o'clock the news was received in Hastings. R. A. Batty and his partner, ]Mr. Ash, lost no time in looking up C. L. Alexander (Curt) and to him was entrusted the mission of transferring the county records to Hastings from Juniata. At that time Mr. Alexander was engaged in the livery stable and horse selling business. He had in his employ a coAvboy by the name of Smith, a thorough westerner and an excellent shot with the revolver. ]\Ir. Alexander pressed Smith into the service for the enterprise at hand. "Sir. Batty and other Hastings men were anxious lest some new legal move made by Juniata would result in another court order retarding the movement of the officers to Hastings; accordingly ]Mr. Alexander Avas instructed to act as rapidly and quietly as possible.

I\Ir. Alexander and his man arrived in Jimiata at about dusk. They had brought with them two teams and two lumber wagons with sideboards. Lamp lights flickered from the windows of the Juniata residences as they entered. The inhabitants were eating their evening meal. Immediately upon the arrival of the wagons there was great activity in the office of the county clerk, A. H. Cramer. Mr. Cramer hastily piled the records upon the desk and JNIr. Alexander and Smith industriously deposited them in the wagons. An air of apprehensive excitement pervaded the place, for feeling in Juniata was high, and though they had lost the legal fight, it would be an exasperating sight to see the records thus loaded ujDon the wagons.

It is just as well that no Juniata residents witnessed these last activities. In a few minutes the wagons Avere rumbling across the prairie towards Hastings, where they arrived about 8 o'clock. A large delegation from town met the returning wagons at about the vicinity of the present Burlington roundhouse. The remainder of the journey was a noisy triumphal progress. The records were deposited in a little frame building, 20 feet long by 20 feet wide, belonging to Mr. Cramer and located at about .509 West Second Street, the present location of the water commissioner's office.

April 9. 1877, the election day, was a day of great excitement throughout Adams County. The conflict raged with great fury at both Hastings and Juniata, perhaps reaching the greater turbulence at the latter point. A considerable number of Hastings people were at Juniata throughout the day. Mr. Cramer was delegated by the Hastings contingent to watch the polls and challenge the votes he thought to be illegal. For Juniata a similar service was performed at the polls at Hastings by A. H. Bowen, assisted by a number of others. Towards noon a large crowd gathered in Juniata and the rising babel of voices grew ominous. JNIr. Cramer felt that something was brewing and he surmised that an effort would be made to rush the i^olls for the casting of illegal votes.

Consi^icuous among those arguing loudly upon the streets during the morning was a fiery Irishman by the name of Tom Mm-phy. He was eager for a fist fight in behalf of Plastings. Opposed to Murphy was Sam Saulisbmy of Juniata. Saulisbury was more or less of a l^rofessional boxer, and how Murphy and Saulisbury managed to refrain from combat during tlie first few hoiu's of voting is inexplicable.

It was just before noon that matters assumed a serious aspect. A force of Juniata men approached the polls in a body. At the head of the column marched Saulisbury, the boxer, but near him marched "Jim Laird." the generalissimo of the affair at hand. Other .Juniata men that had been standing close to ]Mr. Cramer near the polls now crowded closer and closer as their reinforcements approaclied. Closer and closer they crowded until at length JNIr. Cramer could only stay at his jiost by bracing himself against the pressure.

IMeanwhile Hastings men formed to oppose the advancing line. One featm-e of the Hastings lines was the "Committee of Toms"; Toni Farrell, Tom Kernan, Tom Pardue, Tom Murphy and one other. The Hastings line was there to protect the polls, because the word had gone out that Jvniiata was planning to cast a number of illegal votes. The lines met and then the fight was on. At last Murphy and Saulisbury closed in combat, but their encounter failed to hold attention because of a general charge all along the Hastings line. Heads and bodies were made sore that day. Tom Farrell used to relate that while in the midst of tlie battle, he found before him an old. white-headed Juniata man. Tom Farrell had drawn back liis fist to strike the foeman. but the white hairs of his opponent gave him pause. "This won't do, county seat or no coimty seat," thought Tom. But the white-haired man thought, too, but differently. With a (juick movement lie suddenly ])roduced and swung a club and Tom Farrell fell, stunned, to tlie ground.

In a moment more the crowd behind Mr. Cramer surged forward with a yell and the Hastings challenger was forced to retreat and the polls Avere in the hands of Juniata.

yiv. Cramer suav that the Hastings partisans were not numerous enough to enable them to keep anj- further watch over tlie voting. The scene resembled a riot. Some Hastings men were drawing away wounded. Tom ^Murphy's hat was off and he was just stooping to recover it. A man approached, api^arently with the intention of kicking Murphy on the head. But the Irishman was not to be caught. He spiang like a panther and with a well-directed blow laid his assailant full length u^Don the ground.

]Mr. Cramer now sought his horse and mounted, rode to Hastings on the galloj) to apprise the citizens of the state of things. Arriving, he found that Hastings already had the information. Oswald Oliver had telegraphed from Juniata. A moment later Tom Dodd arrived, also upon a foaming horse, and by these messages Hastings was thoroughly wrought. The first care of the men of Hastings was to drive ]Mr. Bowen and the Juniata watchers of the polls away from their post and out of town.

Then a force assembled and e\'ery vehicle was pressed into service to furnish transportation to Juniata. The county seat army carried toward the western village a motley equipment of weapons - whips, clubs, scythes, whatever could be first found. The Hastings men came in such numbers that they were able to overwhelm Juniata, and JMr. Cramer was reinstated at his post as challenger. That evening another disturbance threatened to develop to dangerous proportions, for Hastings insisted that ^Ir. Cramer and Tom Lee should sit within the enclosure and watch the election officials count the ballots, and in this they were finally successful.

The ballot was a small piece of jjaper, bearing the words, "For Relocating the County Seat of Adams County," and the names of the contending towns. The ballots had been prepared on rolls perforated, so that each one could be readily torn off. Mr. Cramer and ]Mr. Lee objected frequently to the counting of certain ballots. One notable instance was where a number of ballots had been cast into the box without taking the trouble to separate them. This probably happened in the excitement about the noon hour. The report of Refei-ee Calkins, however, later indicated that Juniata was not alone in this overzealousness.

The little frame building on Second Street which was the first home of the county offices in Hastings was not a very pretentious affair. It was a square building measuring about 20 feet long by 20 feet wide. This building was occupied by the county for about sixty days. After the expiration of about that time the offices were moved to the present Courthouse Square and housed in a frame build- ing about ll/o stories in height. This building stood a little southeast of the southeast corner of the present courthouse. It was the property of the Paine Lumber ComiJany, who, upon its completion, leased it to Adams Comity.

This building was subsequently sold to Harrison who remodeled it and disjiosed of it to James INladgett, father of William jNIadgett, who at present is mayor of Hastings. It was removed from the Courthouse Square and at present is located at 203 West Seventh Street and is the property and residence of JNIrs. S. C. Johnston. It was in the fall of 1880 that the building was removed from the Courthouse Square, and at that time the county offices were once more moved and installed in the Stone Block, on the second floor. Here they remained mitil during the week of Sei)tember 5 and September 12, 1890, when they were once more moved, this time to be established in the Adams County courthouse that stands on the Courthouse Square.

For some time after the removal from Juniata. Mr. Cramer at times carried on the business of the county clerk in his private office at different locations. Also when the records were moved, SeiJfemlier 27, 1878, there was not included the office of the county treasurer, W. B. Thorne Avas the county treasiu'er and a strong friend of Juniata. ]Mr. Thorne did not transfer his office to Hastings until late in tlie fall of 1878.

As soon as Judge Gaslin decided in favor of Hastings in the election contest of 1877 steps were taken, at the urgent suggestion of iMr. Cramer, to secure to Adams County the block of ground which had been offered as an inducement for the removal of the county seat. This was block 15 in the original town, the j^resent Courtliouse Scjuare. Litigation resulted from this move.

Prior to the election of 1875 The Hastings Town Company had been i^revailed upon to set apart block 15 for the use of the county and to be occupied for the purpose of erecting a courthouse and other county buildings. The company entered into an agreement, with bond, with the county commissioners to deed or release all their right, title or interest in the stated block upon the removal of the county seat to Hastings. The election was held April 6. 1875. and Hastings lost. By its articles of incorporation, the Hastings Town Company Avould dissolve JMay 18, 1875. Having lost the election, the friends of Hastings were desirous that the inducement of a public square should be available for the next contest. Before another election could be held, however, the Hastings Town Company would be dissolved. P ^eion '^as made for this contingency when <m April

30, ] 873, the Hastings Town Company, by a vote of all its members, instructed and authorized the president and secretary of the company to make a deed or deeds to parties entitled thereto by reason of any prior contract, ^^^len shortly afterward the company wound up its affairs and prorated their interest in property undisposed of, block 1.5 was not prorated, because it had been set aside to be given to the county ui)on the condition that the county seat should be removed.

Therefore, when the county seat had been removed the president of the company before its dissolution, Charles K. Lawson, and the secretary, Thomas E. Farrell, executed a quit claim deed to Adams County. This instrument was executed October 8, 1878. Following the dissolution of the Hastings Town Company, jNIay 18, 1875, however, a member of the company, James D. Carl, disposed of certain of his interests to his nephew, John O. Barada, of St. Joseph, Mo. Employing as his attorneys R. A. Batty and Joiin M. Ragan, Barada commenced ejectment proceedings against Adams County on the ground that his uncle had conveyed to him Carl's interest in block 1.3. At that time two trials were had in all ejectment ])roceedings, decision in the first trial formally being made in favor of the plaintiff. The first hearing was held in this case ]May 17, 1880. and a finding was made for Barada. The attorneys for Adams County were Hewett, Yocum and A. T. Ash. December 9, 1880, attorneys for the jdaintiff annoimced the death of Barada, and the following INIarch ISlv. Batty appeared in court as administrator of the estate and party plaintiff with Deliaha Barada, mother, and JNIargaret Barada, sister of John O. Barada. On March 17, 1881, Judge Gaslin delivered judgment in favor of Adams County. The court reviewed the history of the Hastings To^vTi ComiDany from its organiation and pointed out that block 15 had been set apart to be turned over to the county upon condition that such was the purpose of all members of the comjDany, including Carl. The court also found no evidence that the sale by Carl to Barada had involved any consideration. Plaintiffs were ordered to make a quit claim deed to Adams Comity within sixty days.

The plaintiffs, however, were determined to contest the case to the end and appealed from Judge Gaslin's decision to the Supreme Court. The case was submitted and argued in the higher court in the January term, 1882. In July of that year the court, of its own motion, ordered a reargument. Not until January, 188-i, was a decision rendered. Judge Gaslin's decision was affirmed. The question raised in the case was : Did the deeds from the president and secretary of the Hastings Town Company convey the title to the land in ques- tion? The Supreme Court decided that they did, Judge Maxwell remarking in the ruling that the dedication originally made would have been sufficient, although that matter was not gone into.

It was in 1876 that Carl conveyed the lots assigned to him, and also a one-fourth interest in block 1.5 and other property, to Barada, and in 1879 the latter instituted his proceedings.

Almost immediately after the settlement of the controversy concerning the Courthouse Square, steps were taken for the erection of a suitable courthouse. On April 30, 1889, bonds in the sum of $7.3,000 were voted for the erection of a courthouse. The votes resulted as follows: For the bonds Kenesaw gave 11, Highland 10, West Blue 22, Juniata 5, Denver 14., Blaine 20, Roseland 8, Ayr 6, Hanover 8, Logan 2, Zero 9, Little Blue 7, Hastings 1,301; total for tlie bonds, 1,416. Against the bonds Kenesaw gave 108, Verona 60, Highland 51, West Blue 20, Wanda 73, Juniata 239, Denver 3.5, Blaine 12, Cottonwood 69, Roseland 94, Ayr 73, Hanover 34, Logan .54, Silver Lake 33, Zero 27. Little Blue 49, Hastings 7; total against the bonds, 1,040.

On July 9, 1889 the bonds were sold for $77..500, and shortly afterwards the conti-act to furnish the material and build the courthouse was let to J. R. Sims of Hastings for $.59,900. It was stipulated that the building should be finished and ready for occujjancy on or before September 1, 1890. Owing to litigation concerning tlie validity of courthouse bonds in Gage and Cass coimties, the buyers of the Adams County bonds refused to receive or pay for the bonds until the litigation in the other counties was settled, which was several months after the bonds were sold.

Tlie contractor, however, proceeded with the work forthwith, and tlie building was completed near the time stipulated, and the county offices were housed in the new structure during the week elapsing between September 7 and September 12, 1890. The building was constructed under the direction of a committee from the board of supervisors, with Aaron Powers chairman. The other members of tlie committee were F. J. Benedict. William Vastine, B. B. Snodgrass and T. T. Jones. C. C. Rittenhouse of Hastings was the arcliitect.

Undei- the direction of the committee a number of changes were made in the original specifications for tlie building. The total cost, as shown by the report of tlie committee, was $77,81.5.86. That figiu'e includes furniture and sidewalks. The ground dimensions of the building are 9.5 by 11.5 feet. The height to the roof deck is 60 feet and to the top of tlie statue 133 feet. The foundation is of

Colorado sandstone, the walls of St. Louis pressed brick with Wichita stone trimmings. The roof is of slate and the cupola has a covering of metal. The jail, located in the basement, has eight cells, one of which is for women. In the basement, too, are the apartments of the sheriff". The District Court room is on the second floor. Its auditorium is equipj^ed with 240 opera chairs.

Keverting to the long, bitter struggle attending the removal of the county seat, it is pleasing to note that at last the feeling aroused by that contest has subsided. This can be shown in no better way than by quoting from a paper written by INIrs. A. V. Cole for a meeting of Adams County jjeople living in California, in ]March, 1915. Mr. and ]Mrs. Cole were pioneers in Adams County and settled in Jmiiata. Speaking of the days of the contest, INIrs. Cole says: "Hastings, with her rapid growth, soon took from Juniata the county seat, and with it the only building that in any way suggested that we were the honest, legitimate county seat of Adams County. It was the Adams County jail. Such an addition to our towii! About as large as a good-sized dry goods box. But our hopes were built on nothing less tlian that every man, woman and child in Hastings would find in it an abiding place. So with wrath in our hearts and tears in our eyes we watched it disai)pear toward the east, and poor Juniata was no more tlie metropolis of Adams County. Todaj', with loyal hearts we point with pride to Hastings, the queen city, and her beautiful little subiu'b, Jvmiata. where most of us here spent our hard days, along with many haj^py ones."

The county commissioners held their last meeting in Jimiata September 27. 1878. Something of the triumph felt by those who had liattled for Hastings is evident in the bold flourish of letters with which County Clerk A. H. Cramer wrote in the record the date upon Miiich the deliberations of the board began in Hastings, October 10. 1878.