1879 History of Des Moines County
Transcribed by
Lou Bickford &
Janet Brandt
|
THE FIRST STATE HOUSE.
Something of a history attaches to the first State-house erected in Iowa, although the existence of the structure was brief and brilliant. When the Legislature voted to come to Burlington in 1837, there was no suitable place in which the noble body could meet. It became necessary to erect a building.
Now, it chanced that, in the early days, two men of the same name located in Burlington. Both were known as Jeremiah Smith. They were cousins in relationship. To distinguish the one from the other, it became customary to speak of the younger as Jermiah Smith, Jr., while the elder accepted the less respectful title of “Old Jere.”
Jeremiah, Jr., sought after and obtained the job of building the State-house, and during the summer of 1837 he carried out his agreement. When the Legislature assembled, the two houses convened in a two-story frame which did credit alike to the city of Burlington and the contractor. The house was heated by a large fire-place. In December, the heating apparatus proved too much for the general building, and, after the Legislature had adjourned for the night, the boasted State-house disappeared in flame and smoke. The building was located on Main street, between Court and Columbia.
Smith made application to Congress for relief, and his claim was allowed. The amount exceeded $4,000.
A fatality seemed to follow Mr. Smith’s work, for, soon after the allowance of his claim, Old Jere visited the capital. He there met Delegate Jones, who told him, through misapprehension of his identity, that his claim had been allowed and that he could get the money by making the necessary application and receipt. Old Jere was quick to see the possibility of making his trip to Washington a profitable one, and hastened to draw the funds, receipting for them in the name of “Jeremiah Smith,” which he could legally do.
It speedily became known that Old Jere had secured the money, but that was all the good it ever did the rightful owner, for he could never make the old man disgorge. He never obtained a dollar of the allowance.
TEMPORARY QUARTERS.
After the burning of the State-house, the Legislature occupied temporary rooms on opposite side of Main street, corner of Columbia street.
The next session was held in the Methodist Episcopal Church, “Old Zion.” The “Upper House” occupied the lower room, and the “Lower House” the upper. The “Third House” was held in numerous lawyers’ offices, we infer from the manifest influence exerted by the able bar of those days.
From a paper published in the “Annals of Iowa,” from the pen of Mr. Charles Negus, we quote the following concerning the first session of the Legislature in Burlington:
“At the first Legislature of the Territory, there was a great deal of sparing between the members of that body and the Governor and Secretary. This difficulty first commenced with the Secretary. The Council passed a resolution requiring the Secretary to furnish their body with knives, stamps, folder, tin cups, etc. The Secretary not being able at the time to furnish these articles, addressed a communication to the Council on the subject, in which they were informed that the Secretary had made arrangements to procure the necessary stationery for the use of the Legislature, in Cincinnati, but owing to the low stage of water in the Ohio, the things ordered had not been received. The Secretary, in his communication, said, ‘The navigation of the Ohio was entirely suspended; this was the act of God, whose holy name is pronounced with deep reverence, and to whose holy will it is our duty to submit. Human power cannot resist the dispensation of His providence, nor can human wisdom counteract His unfathomable designs.’ The Secretary informed the Council that he had been to St. Louis, ‘and returned in spite of every peril;’ that ‘much exertion had been made to procure knives in Burlington, but, ‘said he, ‘knives of suitable finish and quality could not be procured in town, nor can sufficient knives of any quality be obtained; and the Secretary cannot make knives, -if he could, he would do so with expedition and pleasure:’ that ‘it was the earnest and anxious wish of the Secretary that all the members should have knives and stamps and folders, and all and singular such thing or things, device or devices whatever, as may facilitate the operation of the hands in yielding assistance to deliberations of the heads;’ that in relation to ‘that part of the resolution which related to extra inkstands and tin patty-pans, can, and shall be promptly compiled with.’
“This communication of the Secretary greatly insulted the dignity of the Council, and the matter was referred to a special committee, of whom Stephen Hempstead (afterward Governor) was Chairman. The committee, after due deliberation, made their report, in which they set forth that the Secretary’s communication was ‘of such a nature as to call forth a severe animadversion upon its tone and spirit: ‘that ‘the evident intent of that communication was not only to treat the resolution adopted by the Council with irony and contempt, but at the same time to convey the idea that the articles asked for by the resolution were unnecessary and unimportant. The report went on to show that the house in which they held deliberations was not properly furnished; that the Secretary had used his influence to prevent the Council from obtaining things without his sanction, and ‘that the honorable Secretary of the Territory might rest assured that the present Legislature will not tamely submit to the insults and derisions of any officer of the Territory, and they at all times will defend to the last their honest rights, and the liberty of the people, whom they have the honor to represent.’ This report of the committee was unanimously adopted.
“The controversy about knives, etc., though fiercely commenced, did not last long. The Secretary, through the intervention of Judge Wilson, apologized to the Council, and withdrew the objectionable paper, and the Council let the insult to their dignity pass without further notice.
“But this matter had hardly been adjusted before another difficulty arose, implicating the Governor with the Secretary. The Legislature passed a joint resolution that the Secretary of the Council and Chief Clerk of the House should receive $6 per day for their services in this assembly, and each of the additional clerks, sergeant-at-arms, door-keepers, messengers and firemen should receive $3 per day, to be paid by the Secretary of the Territory upon the presentation of a certificate of their services, signed by the presiding officer of the house in which they served, and countersigned by the Secretary or Clerk.’ The Secretary, doubting whether this would be a sufficient authority for him to pay out money, referred the matter to the Governor, and the Governor gave him his opinion in writing, in which he took the ground that the Secretary ought not to disburse the public moneys under that authority. And the Secretary, being sustained in his views as to the disbursing of the public moneys by the written opinion of the Governor, sent to the Legislature a communication, informing that body that he did not feel authorized to pay out money under such authority, and to sustain his views, sent with the communication the written opinion of the Governor.
“This counseling of the Governor was considered by most of the members of the Legislature as interfering with their prerogatives, and a matter of so great importance that there was a joint convention of the two Houses held to devise ways and means by which to protect their rights against the supposed encroachments of the Governor. This convention passed resolutions expressive of what they considered to be the rights of the Legislature, and in their discussions many of the members severely animadverted upon the part which the Governor had taken in this matter.
“The attacks made upon the Governor at the fore part of the session probably caused him to be a little prejudiced in his feelings toward the members, and less disposed to yield his opinion of what he conceived to be right to the wishes of that body, than he would have been had there been no misunderstanding between them. And from the time of this joint convention, instead of reconciling the strife which had been engendered between His Excellency and the Legislature, the quarrel became sharper and more bitter, until the adjournment:
“Gov. Lucas being an old man, and having occupied the gubernatorial chair in Ohio, thought himself better versed in making laws and what was for the best interests of the Territory than most of the members of the Legislature, who were young men and inexperienced as legislators, and all laws which they passed that did not entirely meet with his approbation, he vetoed. And by the provisions of the organic act of the Territory, it was necessary that the Governor should approve of all bills passed by the Legislature before they could become laws, so that his veto was absolute, and no act of that body could become a law without his consent.
“For the purpose of harmonizing differences, there was a joint committee appointed by both branches of the Legislature to consult with the Governor and prepare a bill to regulate the intercourse between the legislative and executive parties of the Territorial Government. After a consultation with His Excellency, a bill was prepared by the committee, with such restrictions and provisions as met with his approbation; but when it was brought before the Legislature, there were some very material alterations made in the bill which were very obnoxious to the Governor, and when it was presented to him for his approval, he refused to sign it, and returned it to the house in which it originated; and in his veto message, he laid down the rules by which he would be governed in relation to acts presented to him for approval.
“He informed the Legislature that all bills submitted to him would be carefully examined, and if approved, would be deposited in the Secretary’s office; but he said if ‘special objections are found, but not sufficient to induce me to withhold my assent from the bill, a special note will be indorsed with my approval. Bills that may be considered entirely objectionable, or of doubtful policy, will be returned to the Legislative Assembly with my objections, at such times and in such manner as I may from time to time deem most advisable.’ This veto message fanned the flame of strife already enkindled, and many of the members became very bitter toward His Excellency.
“Among the many act vetoed by the Governor was an act requiring him, when a bill was presented for his approval, to inform the Legislature of his approval thereof, or if he did not approve of it, to return the bill with his objections; an act authorizing the Postmaster at Davenport to have the mail carried from that place to Dubuque twice a week in two-horse post-coaches; a joint resolution, making the Secretary of the Territory of fiscal agent of the Legislature, authorizing him to pay out money, without an appropriation, to the members and officers of the Legislature.
“The feelings of the members were so bitter toward the Governor because he kept them in check by his vetoes, that there was a Special Committee appointed in the House, on Vetoes, of which James W. Grimes (afterward Governor and United States Senator) was the Chairman. The organic act provided that the Governor ‘shall approve of all laws passed by the Legislative Assembly before they shall take effect.’ On this provision of the law, the Committee made a lengthy report, in which they took the ground that the words ‘shall approve all law’ meant that it was his imperative duty, under the organic law, to approve of all acts passed by the Legislature of the Territory; and that the mere fact of the Governor vetoing them, or withholding his approval, did not prevent the acts of the Legislature from becoming laws, but was a neglect of duty on the part of the Governor.
“And this report of the Committee was concurred in by the House by a vote of 16 to 6—Bailey, Beeder, Brierly, Coop, Frierson and Patterson voting against it.
“These acts, and the abuse of the Legislature, did not intimidate the Governor in the discharge of his duties, being actuated with a desire to do what he supposed was right, and let those of the future judge of the wisdom of his course.
“When the members of the Legislature found they could not control the Governor by resolutions, reports of committees and abusive speeches, their next move was to remove him from office.
“Bankson introduced a resolution in the House, in which was set forth that, whereas it was known to the Legislature ‘that Gov. Lucas had been writing notes and explanations on sundry laws adopted by the Legislature,’ and also setting forth that these acts of his were ‘an unwarrantable encroachment upon the judicial department of the Territorial Government, as well as an insult and rude invasion of the rights of the Legislature,’ ‘Therefore, Resolved. That Robert Lucas is unfit to be the ruler of a free people, and that a Select Committee be appointed to prepare a report and memorial to the President * * * * praying in strong terms for his immediate removal from office.’
“This resolution was adopted by a vote of 12 to 10, and Bankson, Hall, Summers, Taylor and Nowlin were appointed the Committee. The Committee, after due deliberation, made their report, requesting the President, for various reasons, to remove the Governor from his office.
“There was a majority in both branches of the Legislature who were opposed to the Governor, and the memorial was adopted and forwarded to the President.
“In these proceedings, the Governor was not without some friends who strongly opposed the adoption of the report of the committee, and they claimed the privilege ‘to forward a counter-memorial to the President on the same subject, and to spread their protest on the journal of the House; but their request was refused, when eight of the members of the House, in their private capacity, got up a protest, in which they reviewed the memorial, and denied or explained most of the charges preferred against the Governor, so that from the protest, or some other cause, President Van Buren did not see proper to remove the Governor from his office, and he held it until there was a change in the administration of the Federal Government. The difficulties which had arisen between Gov. Lucas and the Legislature, from his too frequent use of the veto power, and the complaints made by the latter, induced Congress to make some amendments to the law organizing the Territory; and on the 3rd day of March, 1839, they passed two acts, by which it was provided that every bill passed by the Council and House of Representatives should be presented to the Governor, and if he approved it, the same should become a law; if not, he should return it with his objections to the House in which it had originated, for reconsideration, and if both branches of the Legislature passed it by a two-thirds vote, it should then become a law without the approval of the Governor. They also made provisions for authorizing the Legislature to pass laws permitting the people to elect Sheriffs, Judges of Probate, Justices of the Peace and County Surveyors.
“There was likewise a law passed authorizing the Delegate (William W. Chapman), who was elected at the time of organizing the Territory, as Representative to Congress, to hold his seat till the 11th day of October, 1840, and made provision that the next Representative, after Chapman’s term expired, should only hold his seat till the 4th of the next March, after which the term should be the same as other Members of Congress-for the period of two years.
“The Legislature was not slow in taking advantage of these acts of Congress, for at their next session about the first thing that claimed their attention was to make provisions authorizing the people to elect their Sheriffs, Judges of Probate, Justices of the Peace and County Surveyors; and by these acts the Governor was very much curtailed in his power and influence in the Territory.”
RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF DES MOINES COUNTY.
Having thus given an outline of the general history of the Territory of Wisconsin, at its earliest period, we take up the thread of Des Moines County records.
The Territorial Legislature, at Burlington, passed a bill, which was approved January 18, 1838, re-establishing the boundaries of the five original counties [p. 210 Session Laws Wis. Ter. Leg., Burlington, 1838]. Hereafter is quoted the bill in full, because of the scarcity of the old records. It may prove of value for reference in days to come:
An act to establish the boundaries of Lee, Van Buren, Des Moines, Henry, Louisa, Muscatine and Slaughter, to locate the seats of justice in said counties, and for other purposes:
Section 1. Be it enacted by the Council and the House of Representatives of the Territory of Wisconsin, That the boundaries of Lee County shall be as follows, to wit: Beginning at the main channel of the Mississippi River, due east from the entrance of Skunk River into the same, thence up said river to where the township line dividing Townships Sixty-eight and Sixty-nine north leaves said river; thence with said line to the range line between Ranges Four and Five west; thence north with said line to the township line between Townships Sixty-nine and Seventy north; thence west with said line to the range line between Ranges Seven and Eight west; thence south with said line to the Des Moines River; thence down said river to the middle of the main channel of the Mississippi River; thence up the same to the place of beginning, and the seat of justice is hereby established at the town of For Madison.
Sec. 2. The boundaries of the county of Van Buren shall be as follows, to wit: Beginning on the Des Moines River, where the range line between Ranges Seven and eight intersects said river; thence north with said line to the township line dividing Townships Seventy and Seventy-one north; thence west with said line to the range line between Ranges Eleven and Twelve west; thence south with said line to the northern line of Missouri; thence east with said line to the Des Moines River; thence down said river to the place of beginning, and the seat of justice of said county is hereby retained at the town of Farmington, until it may be changed, ad hereinafter provided. For the purpose of permanently establishing the seat of justice for the county of Van Buren, the qualified electors of said county shall, at the election for County Commissioners, vote by ballot for such places as they may see proper for the seat of justice of said county. The returns of said election shall, within thirty days thereafter, be made by the Sheriff of the county to the Governor of the Territory, and if, upon examination, the Governor shall find that any one point voted for has a majority over all other places voted for, he shall issue a proclamation of that fact, and the place so having a majority of votes shall, from the date of such proclamation, be the seat of Justice of said county. But if, upon an examination of the votes, the Governor shall find that no one place has a majority of the whole number of votes polled on that question and returned to him, he shall issue a proclamation or a new election in said county, and shall state, in his proclamation, the two places which were highest in vote at the preceding election, and votes at the election so ordered, shall be confined to the two places thus named. The Governor shall, in his proclamation, fix the time of holding said second election, and it shall be conducted in the same manner, and by the same officers as conducted the election for County Commissioners; and the Sheriff of the county shall, within thirty days thereafter, make return of said second election to the Governor, who shall thereupon issue a second proclamation, declaring which of the two places named in first proclamation was the highest in vote at such second election, and declaring said place from that time to be the seat of Justice of Van Buren County, provided that the spring term of the District Court of said county shall be held at Farmington, the present seat of justice of Van Buren County.
Sec. 3. The boundaries of Des Moines County shall be as follows, to wit: Beginning at the northeast corner of Lee County; thence west with the northern line of said county to the range line between Ranges Four and Five west; thence north with said line to the township line dividing Townships Seventy-two and Seventy-three north; thence east with said line to the middle of the main channel of the Mississippi River; thence down the same to the place of beginning; and the seat of justice of said county is hereby established at the town of Burlington.
Sec. 4. The boundaries of Henry County shall be as follows, to wit: Beginning on the range line between Ranges Four and Five west, where the township line dividing Townships Seventy-three and Seventy-four north intersects said line; thence west with said line to the range line between Ranges Eight and Nine; thence south with said line to the township line dividing Townships Seventy and Seventy-one north; thenceeast with said line to the range line between Ranges Seven and Eight west; thence south with said line to the township line dividing Townships Sixty-nine and Seventy north; thence east with said line to the range line between Ranges Four and Five west; thence north with said line to the place of beginning; and the seat of justice of said county is hereby established at the town of Mount Pleasant; and all the territory west of Henry is hereby attached to the same for judicial purposes.
Sec. 5. The boundaries of Louisa County shall be as follows, to wit: Beginning at the northeast corner of Des Moines County; thence west to the northwest corner of said county; thence north with the range line between Ranges Four and Five west to the township line dividing Townships Seventy-five and Seventy-six north; thence east with said line to the Mississippi River; thence down the same to the place of beginning; and the seat of justice of said county is hereby established at the town of Lower Wapello.
Sec. 6. The boundaries of Muscatine County shall be as follows, to wit: Beginning at the northeast corner of the county of Louisa; thence west with the northern line of said county, to the range line between Four and Five west; thence north with said line, to the township line dividing Townships Seventy-eight and Seventy-nine north; thence east with said line, to the range line between Ranges One and Two east; thence south with said line to the Mississippi River; thence down the main channel of the said river to the place of beginning; and the seat of justice of said county is hereby established at the town of Burlington .
Sec. 7. The county included within the following boundaries, to wit, beginning at the northeast corner of the county of Henry; thence west to the northwest corner of the same; thence north to the township line dividing Townships Seventy-six and Seventy-seven north; thence east with the said line to the line between Ranges Four and Five west; thence south with the said line to the place of beginning, is hereby set off into a separate county by the name of Slaughter, and the seat of justice of said county is hereby established at the town of Astoria; and all the territory west is hereby attached to the county of Slaughter for judicial purposes.
Sec. 8. That the several counties hereby established shall liquidate and pay so much of the debt, as was due and unpaid by the original county of Des Moines, on the first day of December, eighteen hundred and thirty-six, as may be their legal and equitable proportion of the same, according to the assessment value of the taxable property therein.
Approved, January 18, 1838.
It will be seen that the natural southern boundary of Des Moines was not regarded, and township lines were chosen as the dividing lines. The present division at Skunk River was a more recent matter, as will hereafter be shown.
On the 29th of December, 1838, the Territorial Legislature approved of an act providing for the establishment of a road from the “town of Du Buque to the northern boundary of Missouri, via of the Territorial seat of government,” which was Burlington. It was either to be located in Johnson County, or on the nearest and best route to Keosauqua, thence southward to where Keokuk now stands. Simeon Clark, of Dubuque County, William Chamber, of Muscatine County, and Henry Filkner, of Johnson County, were appointed Commissioners to lay out the road as far as the southern line of Johnson County; and David Goble, of Washington County, John Williford, of Henry County, and William Billups, of Van Buren County, were appointed to locate the road from the point where the other Commissioners stopped, to the line of Missouri. The County Commissioners of the several counties through which the road passed were to pay the expenses in their respective proportions to the amount of the road laid out in each. The Road Commissioners were to receive each $2.50 per day for their services, and were to mark the road as it was laid out by blazing trees in the woods and setting stakes in the prairies.
January 18, 1838, Levi Moffit was authorized to maintain a ferry across Skunk River, near Augusta.
|