COUNTY SEAT STRUGGLES.
The act of the Territorial Legislature organizing Coffey County, approved
February 17, 1857, located the county seat, temporarily, at Le Roy. The same
act also provided for the election of three commissioners by the people of the
county at a special election, for the purpose of selecting a site at the most
practicable point near the center of the county for the permanent location of
the county seat. An election for commissioners was held in pursuance of that
act September 25, 1857. Concerning this election Judge Enos Strawn makes the
following statement: "There were only five candidates at that election---Mr.
Wooster, east of Le Roy, Mr. Evans, west of Le Roy, Dr. Cutler (then of
Burlington), myself, and the name of the fifth candidate I have forgotten.
[F. A. Atherly says that Clark Tritt was the name of the other candidate.]
The election came off on the 25th of September, 1857. I received 476 votes,
Evans and Wooster received 346 votes each, and Cutler and the other man were a
good ways behind. After I found out I was elected I went to Lawrence to see
the Burlington Town Company. The company held a meeting and proposed to give
Coffey County the park in Burlington (now partly occupied by the school house
and court house), forty lots around the park, and finish the bridge across the
river then in erection, providing the commissioners would locate the county
seat at Burlington. I then saw Evans and Wooster; they agreed to meet me at
Ottumwa on the 10th of November, 1857. When I arrived there they had gone
home. They left word for me to meet them at Le Roy on the following Monday at
12 o'clock A. M., when we would locate the county seat. John T. Cox and I
went to Le Roy on the day appointed, arriving there at 11 o'clock A. M. Evans
and Wooster had met there, located the county seat at Le Roy, and gone home.
The whole town was drunk. The candidates on the Burlington ticket were Doctor
Cutler, myself, and the man whose name I have forgotten; and the Le Roy
candidates were Wooster, Evans, and myself. Of course, the Le Roy ticket was
elected. Wooster and Evans located the county seat at Le Roy; I had no hand
in it. I was sworn in as locating commissioner by Alexander Hamilton, in the
timber at Le Roy." Owing to the fact that the territorial authorities were
Democratic, in harmony with the politics of the people of Le Roy, it was
deemed inexpedient by the Burlington people to contest the election, and
therefore nothing was done about it.
By an act of the Territorial Legislature, approved February 12, 1858, the
county seat was removed from Le Roy and located, temporarily, at Burlington.
The same act also provided for its permanent location by a vote of the people
at the next general election (October 4, 1858). From June 5, 1858, until
October of that year, the sessions of the board of Supervisors were held at
Hampden, where the County Clerk, Silas Fearl, resided, but all of the other
county officials resided and held their offices at Le Roy. The first meeting
of the Board of Supervisors held at Burlington was on the 5th of October,
1858. On the 5th of June, 1858, it was ordered by the Supervisors, at their
meeting at Hampden, that a jail should be erected at Burlington, "the county
seat," but on the 26th of the same month this order was revoked. On the 26th
of June, 1858, the Supervisors passed an order directing the County Clerk and
Register of Deeds to "remove their respective offices as near the center of
the county as can be provided for by the Board of Supervisors." The Board of
Supervisors at this time consisted of seven members. Each township had three
Trustees, and the Chairman of each township was ex officio, a member of
the County Board of Supervisors. The seven municipal townships then in
existence were Le Roy, Avon, Ottumwa, Pottawatomie, California, Burlington,
and Neosho.
At the election for the permanent location of the county seat held October 4,
1858, the result was as follows:
Precincts. Le Roy. Burlington. Hampden. Nashville. Neosho City.
Neosho 1 24 0 0 0
Avon 3 11 1 2 0
Burlington 5 149 0 0 0
Le Roy 197 7 0 0 1
--- --- - - -
Total 206 191 1 2 1
The foregoing table is taken from the records in the office of the Secretary
of State at Topeka. No record of this vote or of any proceedings of the
Supervisors in relation to it can be found in the County Clerk's office of
Coffey County. For some unexplained cause Le Roy was not officially declared
the county-seat, although the county officers continued to hold their offices
at that place. On the 7th of March, 1859, Rush Elmore, Judge of the Third
Judicial District, arrived at Burlington to hold a session of court for Coffey
County. Neither the Clerk nor Sheriff was in attendance, their offices being
held at Le Roy. In pursuance of the Judge's order these officials immediately
removed to Burlington with their official records and the court was held there.
From that time Burlington was officially recognized as the county seat. March
11, 1859, a peremptory mandamus was issued from Judge Elmore's court,
commanding S. J. Bacon, County Recorder, to remove his office to Burlington.
At the session of the Territorial Legislature held in January and February
1860, the boundaries of many county lines were changed and new counties formed
for the purpose of giving central locations to towns aspiring to be county
seats. Many members of that Legislature were elected on the county line
issue. The members of the House from the Twenty-second Representative
District consisting of the counties of Osage and Coffey, at that session were
O. H. Sheldon, of Burlingame, Osage County, and Geo. W. Nelson, of Le Roy,
Coffey County. On the 1st of February, 1860, Mr. Nelson introduced House Bill
No. 174, an act defining the boundaries of Shawnee, Osage, Neosho, Coffey and
Woodson counties. The purpose of this bill was fully explained in the minority
report of the committee on county lines and county-seats to whom the bill was
referred. The majority report recommended the passage of the bill and was
signed by E. Lynde, Chairman, James H. Jones and George W. Nelson. The minority
report was signed by H. R. Dutton and Thomas Lindsey, and was as follows:
The undersigned members of the Committee on County and County Lines,
respectfully dissent from a report of the majority of the Committee on House
Bill No. 174. "An Act defining the boundaries of Shawnee, Osage, Neosho,
Coffey and Woodson counties," for the following reasons: First, from a
careful consideration of the petition and remonstrances presented upon the
subject, we are satisfied that a majority of the people interested are opposed
to the proposed change. Second, the bill reduces the size of four important
and well organized counties, viz: Jackson, Shawnee, Coffey and Woodson--the
latter to the extent that it would be impossible to maintain a county
organization, while there is not a single petition from that county asking the
proposed change; but, on the other hand, 182 voters out of 200, the whole
number in the county, remonstrate against such change. The bill reduces
Coffey County from twenty-four to eighteen miles in width, and organizes
Neosho County with only fifteen miles in width, subject to settlement, thereby
greatly enhancing the expense of supporting these county organizations.
Third, we are further satisfied that this whole scheme has for its only object
the making of county seats in localities where nothing but this proposed kind
of legislation would ever place them, as by the provisions of the bill, three
county seats already existing are destroyed and four new ones are
established; and, further, that this is but the initiatory step toward
carving out the whole territory, for the purpose of building up certain local
interests, without regard to the public interests or the public good; and the
undersigned respectfully protest against that system of legislation which is
continually directed toward some local and in many instances personal
interests, to the exclusion of these more important measures which merit and
demand our whole time and attention.
The majority report of the committee, recommending the passage of the bill,
was rejected by eleven yeas to twenty-one nays. This action on the reports
was not had until on the 17th of February, the intervening time between the
1st and the 17th being occupied by the friends and opponents of the bill in
laboring with the committee to adopt recommendations favorable to their
respective sides. Petitions and remonstrances from the people of every county
interested in the bill poured in upon the Legislature.
On the 20th of February Mr. Nelson introduced House Bill No. 411, "An Act to
change the boundary between the counties of Coffey and Woodson." This bill
proposed to attach six miles from the southern portion of Coffey County to
Woodson County and to make Le Roy the temporary county seat; February 23 this
bill passed the house by thirty yeas to two nays. The members voting in the
affirmative were Messrs. Brown, Brooks, Chandler, Caniff, Cornwell, Cave,
Dutton, Elliott, Fitzpatrick, Heath, Jones, Lombard, Lindsey, Murphy, McMath,
Martin, Noel, Nelson, Parks, Pierce, Robertson, Reynolds, Steward, Sims,
Shively, Sheldon, Scott, Sopris, Whitehead, Wagstaff and Mr. Speaker.
Those voting in the negative were Messrs. Bartlett and Wood.
February 25, in the Territorial Council, James M. Hendry and Chester Thomas
submitted a majority report on House Bill No. 411, recommending its indefinite
postponement. C. G. Keeler submitted a minority report, recommending its
passage without amendment. The majority report was adopted by eight ayes to
five nays. The councilmen voting in the affirmative were Messrs. Benton,
Hendry, Mathias, Palmer, Stewart, Thomas, Woodward and Mr. President
(Updegraff). Those voting in the negative were Messrs. Beebe, Christison,
Elder, Keeler and Lambden.
Mr. Nelson then introduced a bill providing for another "permanent location"
of the county seat of Coffey County, which passed the House but was defeated
in the Senate.
This brief history of the effort to change the boundaries of Coffey County has
been given here to show the cause of the many conflicts that occurred in this
county on the county seat question. Le Roy and Ottumwa had hopes of so
dividing the county as to make both places the centers of new counties that
might be established by such division. Subsequent efforts were made to change
the county lines, but they were always thwarted by the opposition of
Burlington before they assumed any formidable proportions.
In April, 1861, another act for the "permanent location" of the county seat of
Coffey County was passed by the State Legislature. The bill was introduced by
Dr. G. A. Cutler, of Le Roy, and the act was approved April 30. The first
election under the act was held June 11, which resulted as follows:
Le Roy. Burlington. Hampden.
Hampden 1 3 41
Nashville 37 1 31
California 0 22 34
Ottumwa 5 17 52
Neosho 42 24 1
Le Roy 130 0 0
Burlington 2 136 0
--- --- ---
Total 217 193 159
No town having received a majority of the votes, another election was held
November 5, at which Le Roy received 303 votes, Burlington 275 and Hampden 1.
No record by precinct is given of this vote. January 7, 1862, the board of
County Commissioners met at Le Roy. Neither the County Clerk, I. E. Olney,
nor his official records appearing, Dr. J. Jenks was appointed clerk pro
tem, who served as such through that session of the board. At the next
meeting of the board, April 7, Mr Olney was in attendance and recorded its
proceedings. Other county officials, however, refused to recognize Le Roy as
the county seat and did not remove their offices thither. Suits were
instituted against them compelling the removal of their offices to Le Roy and
a suit was also instituted against Ahijah Jones, District Clerk, compelling
him to remove his office from Le Roy to Burlington. These were
mandamus suits. The petition for the mandamus against Jones was
heard by Judge R. M. Ruggles during a session of the court at Le Roy, August
21, 1862. The case was entitled "State of Kansas on the relation of B. L.
Kingsbury and F. A. Atherly vs. Ahijah Jones, Clerk of the District
Court of Coffey County; petition for mandamus." The petition was
granted and a writ of peremptory mandamus was ordered, commanding Mr.
Jones to remove his office forthwith to Burlington. The ground upon which
this petition was granted was that the County Commissioners, having failed to
publish a proclamation for a second election on the county seat, the second
election was void. The judge therefore decided that Burlington was still the
county seat. In vindication of the commissioners it may be stated that the
required proclamation was ordered by them to be published in the Neosho
Valley Register at Burlington, and a copy of the proclamation was handed
by the County Clerk, in timely season, to the editor, who left the copy on a
composing stand while absent at dinner. Upon his return the copy was
missing. He immediately notified the County Clerk of the loss and requested
another copy, but it was never furnished. Mr. Jones took an appeal to the
Supreme Court and was allowed to retain his office at Le Roy upon his filing a
bond in the sum of $200. In pursuance of this decision of the judge, at a
special session of the Board of County Commissioners, held at Le Roy, August
26, the following order was passed:
It is ordered by the Board that the County Clerk, County Treasurer, Register
of Deeds, Sheriff and Probate Judge immediately proceed to occupy the several
offices provided by them in the town of Burlington, which is decided to be the
county seat of the county of Coffey by the District Court for said county.
Said offices to be held in the upper and lower rooms of Kingsbury's building,
in said town, and the County Clerk is requested to notify said officers of
said order.
HARDIN MCMAHON,
I. E. OLNEY, County Clerk.
R. B. WOODWORTH,
A. A. Burr, the other commissioner, was present, but did not sign the order.
The next meeting of the Board of County Commissioners was held at Burlington,
October 6, 1862. All of the county officers, with the exception of District
Clerk, had removed their offices to Burlington. At the January, 1863, term of
the Supreme Court of the State, the decision of Judge Ruggles in the
mandamus case was affirmed. Ahijah Jones thereupon removed his office
to Burlington, February 16, 1873. The District Court, Judge Ruggles presiding,
met at Burlington, and that session of the February term was held there.
April 7, 1863, in pursuance of a petition of three-fifths of the voters of the
county, another election was ordered to be held on the 19th of May, 1863, for
the "permanent location" of the county seat of Coffey County. The election
resulted as follows:
Precincts. Burlington. Hampden. Ottumwa. Spring Creek.
Burlington 83 3 0 0
Ottumwa 3 22 31 0
Le Roy 0 94 0 1
Avon 5 69 0 0
California 17 14 12 0
Pottawatomie 0 14 1 0
Neosho 26 6 9 0
--- --- -- -
Total 134 222 44 1
Hampden having received a majority of all the votes cast, was duly declared
the county seat by the County Commissioners, May 23, 1863.
The next election for the "permanent location" of the county seat of Coffey
County was held November 7, 1865, in pursuance of a proclamation ordering the
same, issued by the County Commissioners October 3. A petition for the
election, signed by three-fifths of the voters, had previously been presented
to the Board. The result of this election was as follows:
Precincts. Burlington. Hampden. Ottumwa.
Hampden 18 36 1
Nashville 10 35 3
Burlington 122 0 0
California 19 3 46
Le Roy 2 94 30
Neosho 36 4 2
Ottumwa 6 11 83
Pottawatomie 6 8 0
--- --- ---
Total 219 191 165
No town having received a majority of the votes, another election, to be
confined to the two points receiving the highest number of votes at the first
election, was ordered by the County Commissioners to be held November 21,
1865. This election resulted as follows:
Precincts. Burlington. Hampden. Ottumwa.
Hampden 24 30 0
Nashville 33 32 0
California 40 25 0
Burlington 149 0 0
Pottawatomie 17 4 0
Ottumwa 33 36 1
Le Roy 3 142 0
Neosho 43 20 0
--- --- -
Total 342 289 1
November 25, 1865, Burlington was declared the county seat by the Board of
Commissioners. January 1, 1866, the Board of County Commissioners met in the
upper story of the Hurlbut building, in Burlington. This story was rented one
year for county offices for $100.
October 26, 1866, the County Commissioners issued an order for another
election for the permanent location of the county seat of Coffey County, to be
held December 4, in pursuance to a petition for such an election, signed by
three-fifths of the voters. The result of this election was as follows:
Precincts. Burlington. Ottumwa. Hampden. Blank.
Nashville 21 17 0 0
Hampden 66 1 2 1
Burlington 158 1 0 0
California 26 45 0 0
Le Roy 2 153 0 0
Neosho 29 23 0 0
Ottumwa 12 90 0 0
Pottawatomie 14 0 0 0
--- --- - -
Total 328 330 2 1
No town having received a majority of the votes, another election was ordered
by the County Commissioners, to be held December 18, 1866, which resulted as
follows:
Precincts. Burlington. Ottumwa. Blank.
Nashville 28 32 0
Hampden 80 8 1
Burlington 194 1 0
California 18 61 0
Le Roy 6 171 0
Neosho 41 29 0
Ottumwa 24 94 0
Pottawatomie 25 3 0
--- --- -
Total 416 399 1
Burlington was proclaimed the county seat by the County Commissioners on the
22d (sic) of December, 1866.
This was the last election for the "permanent location" of the county seat of
Coffey County. The county seat has remained at Burlington since November 25,
1865. The main cause of the many elections on this question was the hope of
the people of Le Roy and Ottumwa of dividing the county, as has been
previously stated. It was believed by them that by locating the county seat
either at Le Roy or Ottumwa, the prospect of so dividing the county as to make
both towns centres of new counties, would be strengthened. Again there were
other people who assisted in keeping the agitation alive for mercenary
motives. A county seat election afforded them opportunities of selling their
votes and influence to the highest bidder. At the last election a contract
was made between the managers in the interest of Burlington and a Le Roy man,
whereby the latter was to receive $50 for every vote cast at Le Roy for
Burlington. Six votes for Burlington were clandestinely cast at Le Roy at
that time, for which the "party of the second part" received $300. These
county seat elections reeked with corruption, and all interested parties and
participants were more or less tainted with it.
|
![[TOC]](../images/bttoc.gif)
![[part 4]](../images/btnext.gif)
![[part 2]](../images/btprev.gif)
![[Cutler's History]](../images/hok.gif)