345

LOCATION OF THE COUNTY-SEAT.

     The board of commissioners chosen at this election met on the 15th day of August, and, after being qualified, proceeded to business. The first official action claiming their attention was in reference to the new county-seat.
     The following is a copy of the first order on that subject:

     Ordered, That the seat of justice of the county of Washington, which was located on the southwest quarter of section 17, township 75, range 7, by Thomas Ritchey and John Gilliland, who were duly appointed commissioners for that purpose by the legislative assembly of the Territory, be known and designated by the name of Washington.

     The land upon which was located the site for the new county-seat was a

346

part of the claim of Nathan Baker, and had not yet been entered; consequently it was necessary to secure the right of Baker's claim and enter the land at the Land-Office. It does not appear that Baker received anything for his claim, and as he could well afford to relinquish part of his claim in order to have the county-seat located at that place, he probably made no demand for compensation. The commissioners, at a subsequent meeting, ordered the land to be entered; and the record says that it was entered by Simon P. Teeple and Richard Moore, commissioners of Washington county, October 15, 1839.
     The commissioners also ordered the clerk of the board to advertise a sale of lots in Washington on Monday, August 19, 1839, to continue two days, if necessary, upon the following conditions: One-eighth cash in hand, the remainder in three equal payments in six, twelve and eighteen months, and to employ a surveyor to survey and plat the town. In accordance with the provisions of this order the clerk employed J.. M. Snyder, who, assisted by Caldwell Neil, Thomas M. Neil, William Basey and Nathan Baker, subdivided the town site into blocks and lots. Upon the day specified Joseph Patterson, as crier, offered lots for sale on the following conditions:
     First. The commissioners of the county shall place an estimated price on each and every lot offered for sale, which shall be considered the bid of the county.
     Second. The highest bidder shall be considered the purchaser by paying one-eighth cash down and the remainder in three equal installments payable in six, twelve and eighteen months, for which notes shall be required.
     Third. Bonds will be given for a general warranty deed, officially executed, and bearing date August 19, 1839.
     At this sale twenty-four lots were sold at an average price of $38.15 amounting in all to $915.50.
     The following is a list of the lots sold, with names of purchaser and the
price paid for each:

Lot 1, block 17, Nathan Baker............................................$54.00
Lot 5, block 14, Joseph Rogers............................................40.00
Lot 4, block 14, Joseph Patterson.......................................40.00
Lot 8, block 8, Jerimiah Buford...........................................72.00
Lot 3, block 12, George H. Stone..........................................25.00
Lot 6, block 12, Theodore Teeple.........................................30.00
Lot 7, block 12, William Conner.............................................51.00
Lot 1, block 18, Thomas Becker..............................................68.00
Lot 4, block 19, John Duke......................................................50.00
Lot 3, block 18, William Ayers................................................42.00
Lot 2, block 18, Richard Moore..............................................45.00
Lot 1, block 16, Luke Teeple....................................................37.00
Lot 2, block 15, W. G. Livermore............................................21.00
Lot 4, block 15, William M. Harvey.......................................15.00
Lot 8, block 6, E. B. Hughes.....................................................21.00
Lot 7, block 7, Joseph Basey..................................................35.00
Lot 1, block 24, Joseph Patterson.........................................26.00
Lot 2, block 24, John Crill.......................................................20.50
Lot 8, block 17, Thomas Baker................................................31.00
Lot 8, block 18, Israel Smith...................................................30.00
Lot 8, block 15, William Basey................................................27.00
Lot 7, block 15, Marcus Hall....................................................16.00
Lot 8, block 7, Jeremiah Buford............................................50.00
Lot 5, block 8, Thomas Ritchey...............................................69.00

     The lot where the Bryson House is located, then as now, was considered the most valuable in the town, and is the one bought by Jeremiah
 
347

Buford for $72; the one, bought by Thomas Ritchey for $69 is the one w4ere Everson's Opera-house is now located. Thomas Baker- was the purchaser of the lot where the First United Presbyterian Church now stands, paying for the same $31. The lot on the southeast corner of the public square was also bought by Thomas Baker, it selling for $68.

FURTHER PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMISSIONER'S COURT.

     At the first meeting of the county commissioners it seems that Morgan Hart was not present, and did not appear for the purpose of being qualified to enter upon the duties of his office till the 16th day of September, 1839.
     Simon P. Teeple and Richard Moore were duly qualified on the 15th of August, taking the following oath:
     I do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States of America and the laws of this Territory, and that I will faithfully and impartially perform the duties of the office of county commissioner of the county of Washington, in Iowa Territory, and that I will use all honorable and lawful means in my power to promote the general interests and prosperity of said county, agreeable to my conceptions of the law, and the 'best of my ability, so help me, God.

FIRST COURT-HOUSE.

     On the 7th of September, 1839, an order for the erection of a tempoary [temporary] court-house was made, and on the 21st of October, of the same year,
Milo Holcomb, then sheriff of the county, offered the same at public outcry / and the contract was awarded to Joseph Neil for $759.00. On the 23d of November following, a written contract was entered into for the erection of this building on lot 4, block 18, on the southwest corner of the square.

ROAD DISTRICTS.

     On the 7th of April, 1840, at a meeting of the board of commissioners an order was made dividing the county into road districts. The order was .as follows:

     All the surveyed townships shall each constitute a road district, and all that portion ()f said county south of Skunk river and east of Honey creek shall constitute a road district; all lying west of the range line dividing ranges 7 and 8, north of Skunk river, and south of the center of the prairie between said river and the west fork of Crooked creek, shall constitute a road district, and numbered as follows: No.1, township 74, range 6; No.2, township 74, range 7; No.3, township 75, range 7; No.4, township 75, range 8; No.5, south of Skunk river and east of Honey creek; No.6, south. of Skunk river and west of Honey creek; No.7, the reminder of the county.

     At the same time the following road supervisors were appointed:
     No. 1, Matthew Moorhead and Robert Jamison; No. 2, Abraham Custer and Thomas Houston; No. 3, William Basey and Thomas Wilson; No. 4, A. Hulock and David Goble, Jr.; No. 5, Jeremiah Field and John Lewis; No. 6, Lemuel G. Collins and Isaac Jordan; No. 7, Elihu Hiatt and John Maley.
     We have already seen that the commissioners had at a former meeting divided the county into voting precincts. At the July meeting of the new board, 1840, another division of the county into precincts was made, as follows:

348

VOTING PRECINCTS.

First - Crawfordsvi11e, township 74, range 6.
Second -Long Creek, township 75, range 6.
Third - Washington, township 75, range 7.
Fourth - Crooked Creek, township 74, range 7.
Fifth - Brighton, all south of Skunk river and east of Honey Creek.
Sixth - Richland, all south of Skunk river and west of Honey Creek.
Seventh - Walnut Creek, all north of Skunk river, east of Indian creek, south of township line between 74 and 75, and west of range line between 7 and 8.
Eighth - Dutch Creek, all north of Skunk river, west of Indian creek and south of township line between 75 and 76.
Ninth - English River, all north of township line between 75 and 76, except township 76, ranges 7 and 8.
Tenth - Iowa, all east of the first line above described.
Eleventh - All west of English River township, and the Indian boundary line:
     It will be noticed from the foregoing that Crawfordsville precinct, as then constituted, was the same as the present township of Crawford; Long Creek was the same as the present township of Oregon; Washington precinct was in the main identical with Washington township as now constituted, with the exception of certain additions since made on the south and west; Crooked Creek precinct in the main corresponded with the present township of Marion; Brighton precinct comprehended a small portion of the present township of Brighton and all of Olay; Richland precinct was what now constitutes Richland township, Keokuk county; Dutch Creek precinct corresponded in the main with the present township of Dutch Creek; English River precinct, as originally constituted, contained a large portion of what now comprises English River township, together with other territory; Iowa precinct included the territory which now comprises Iowa township, together with Highland and a portion of Fremont township, in Johnson county; Lime Creek precinct was what now consitutes [constitutes] Lime Creek township, and a large portion of Cedar and all of Seventy-six.
     In April, 1841, the commissioners changed the boundaries of English River precinct, the precinct at that time being constituted as follows:
     "All lying between a line drawn north and south eight miles from the east line of the county and a similar line drawn sixteen miles distant."

FERRIES.

     At the time there were no bridges in the county and travelers in times of high water had to depend on ferries, which from time to time were established at various points along the rivers., It was customary for the commissioners, on payment of a certain fee, to license certain persons to maintain ferries for the benefit of the public and prescribe the rate of ferriage. The record of the first license thus granted was made April 7, 1841. The order was as follows:

     Ordered, That William Pickerel be licensed to keep a ferry across Skunk river above his mill on the payment into the county treasury of the sum of two dollars and that the rate of ferriage which he shall be entitled to charge shall be six and one-fourth cents for each foot-

349

man, twelve and a-half cents for each horse and man, twenty-five cents for each single horse and wagon, thirty-seven and a-half cents for two horses with wagon, each additional horse twelve and a-half cents, six and one-fourth cents for cattle, sheep and hogs, drivers in all cases included.

     The Brighton ferry, near Smedley's mill, was licensed July 3, 1843, to Thomas J. Gordon. On July 3, 1848, Thompson Dray was licensed to operate .the ferry for a term of five years, paying for the same the sum of two dollars for the first year, and such sum from year to year thereafter as the board of commissioners chose to fix.

FIRST JAIL.

     At the session of the board of commissioners held in April, 1841, the clerk of the board was instructed to give notice by written advertisement in three of the most public places in the county, that the contract for the building of a wooden jail would be let on the first day of June next.
     Alexander Lee, J. B. Davis, and Thomas Baker secured the contract and were ordered to build the jail on lot 3, block 8. On the 13th of August, 1842, the following receipt was placed on record:
     Received of the board of commissioners the sum of $1,020 as follows: $984 in county orders on the town of Washington and lot 5, block 2, and lot 6, block 11, for $36; all being in full payment on my several contracts to build, finish and complete a county jail in said town of Washington, Territory of Iowa. In witness, etc.,
ALEX. LEE.

     From which it would appear that the other two contractors were relieved from the oblligation of their contract and Mr. Lee assumed the whole contract.
     At the session of the board during the following October the clerk was ordered to contract with Albert Sturgis in the sum of $70 for the enclosing of the public square, work to be finished by April 1, 1842. The contract was made and subsequently the time was extended till the first Monday in July following, but from some Cause the enclosure was never made under the contract.

TOWNSHIP ORGANIZATION.

     At a meeting of the board of county commissioners held Jan. 3, 1844, the county was for the first time subdivided into civil townships, which subsequently perfected their township organization. The civil townships, as constituted at that time, were as follows:

IOWA.
    Townships 76 and 77, range 6, and sections from 1 to 3, 10 to 15,22 to 27, and 34 to 36, inclusive, in township 77, range 7; and sections from 1 to 3 and 10 to 15, inclusive, of' township 76, range 7.

ENGLISH RIVER.
     Sections from 4 to 9, 16 to 21 and 28 to 33, inclusive, in township 11, range 7; and sections from 4 to 9 and 16 to 18, inclusive, in township 76, range 7; and sections from 1 to 15,22 to 27 and 34 to 36, inclusive, in township 77, range 8; and sections from 1 to 3 and from 11 to 15, inclusive, in township 76, range 8.

350

LIME CREEK.
    Sections from 4 to 9, 16 to 21 and 28 to 33, inclusive, in township 77, range 8; and sections from 4 to 9 and 16 to 18 in township 76, range 8; and sections from 1 to 18, inclusive, in township 76, range 9; and township 77, range 9.

CRAWFORD.
    Townships 74 and 75, range 6.

MARION.
    Township 74, range 7.

WASHINGTON.
    Township 75, range 7, and sections from 19 to 36, inclusive, in township 76, range 7.

CEDAR.
    Township 75, range 8, and sections from 19 to 36, inclusive, in township 76, range 8.

BRIGHTON.
    Township 74, range 8.

DUTCH CREEK.
    Township 75, range 9 and sections from 19 to 36, inclusive, in township 16, range 9.

CLAY.
    Township 74, range 9.
    At a meeting of the board in October following, it was ordered that the
boundaries of Dutch Creek township should be so altered as to extend from Skunk river to the center of what is now Seventy-six.
    On the first Monday of April, 1845, English River, Lime Creek, Dutch Creek, Brighton and Cedar townships, were duly organized by the election of the usual corps of township officials.

SECOND COURT-HOUSE.

     At a meeting of the Board in February, 1845, a contract was entered into with Alex. Lee, for the building and completion of a new court-house in the town of Washington. The articles of agreement and specifications not appearing to be in existence, we can not give a correct statement of the contract. We found subsequent entries from which we learn that the building was to be of birch, and to be completed at a specified time, and that on the 9th day of January, 1847. Mr. Lee was given till June lst, 184:7, to finish his contract. On the seventh day of July, 1847, Mr. Lee presented the court-house for acceptance, but the board rejected it, and upon agreement the matter was referred to Henry Goosman, Lyman Whitcomb, David P. Sturges, B. P. Baldwin and P. O. McKinsey, who deducted on account of carpenter work on the cupola, fifty dollars, and on the balance of the building, one hundred and ten dollars, which was accepted by both parties.

351

On the 13th of April, 1847, Mr. Lee, the architect of the building, was 31Iowed to have any of the unsold lots in Washington at five dollars each, on 'the court-house contract. The price now seems to have been very low, but it .must have been considered very high then, for Mr. Lee does not appear to have taken advantage of the offer.
The Board seems to have had some litigation on its hands in 1845, for it appears that that year they employed an attorney at the remarkable salary of $25 per annum.
The last session of the old board of county commissioners was held on the 28th day July, 1851, at which time the only business done was to levy taxes for that year, among which we notice a poll tax of$2.50; $2.00 for road purposes, and fifty cents for county purposes. At this meeting Michael Hayes and John B. Webster transacted the business, the third commissioner, Mr. Robinson, being absent.

COUNTY JUDGE.

     In 1851 the board of county commissioners was superseded by the office of county judge. The gentleman first exalted to the honors and emoluments of this office was Enoch Ross. The management of county affairs being thus left in the hands of one individual the county judge was in a small way a veritable despot; his word was final in the adjudication of claims against the county; he located roads, levied taxes, built bridges, erected court-houses and jails, and was amenable to no one except on day of election. Notwithstanding the almost unlimited authority exercised by this official and the large amount of money constantly at his disposal we do not find that the trust was frequently betrayed. During the whole time that county affairs were in the hands of the county judge there was but one case, throughout the entire State, in which this official proved corrupt and was false to the trust confided in him. This seems to be remarkable and we are lead to inquire the cause. Was it because the people were peculiarly fortunate in the selection of men for that office? Men whom the consciousness of power could not corrupt and money could not buy? Or is there some philosophy whereby may be explained this wonderful purity of one man power? We are inclined to the latter opinion. It is a law of social being that men are more swift to go with the multitude in the way to do evil than to individually assume the responsibility of an evil act, and the risk which few men would be willing to individually assume there are many who would be wil1ing to divide. Thus it is that the county judge was more than usually accommodating, careful and particular. Should he make a mistake, he must alone assume the responsibility; should he arrogate authority or misappropriate funds, he alone must bear the odium of the crime. Thus it followed, too, that county judges enjoyed to a remarkable degree the confidence of the people and their tenure of office was longer than other officials, they generally having been elected for three and four terms. Mr. Ross was no exception to this rule and when the county judge system gave place to the board of fifteen, we find him elected as a member of this board arid upon its organization promoted to the chairmanship.

352

THE BOARD OF FIFTEEN.

     The county judge system of county management expired Jan. 1, 1861, and was succeeded by a board of supervisors consisting of fifteen members, one from each township. The first session was held Jan. 7, 1861, and the following named gentlemen constituted the body:
Enoch Ross, Washington township.
B. H. Wilder, Clay township.
D. W. Cauffman, Brighton township.
Evan Park, Marion township.
Matthew Moorhead, Crawford township.
James Stewart, Oregon township.
D. W. White, Franklin township.
W. S. Hamilton, Seventy-six township.
Marshall Goodspeed, Cedar township.
Alexander Gibson, Jackson township.
George Means, Highland township.
Thomas M. Moore, Iowa township.
Robert McOallister, English River township.
S. A. Waters, Lime Creek township.
John Rhinhart, Dutch Creek township.
     This minature legislature had charge of county affairs during the most critical period of the country and while the management was in the main satisfactory the body proved to be too cumbrous, and while theoretically each section of the county was represented in the board, practically it was usually the case that one man of more than average intelligence and force of character controlled the entire board, and if he inclined to engage in some little job he had the less hesitancy in doing so from the fact that there were fourteen others with whom he could share the responsibility. After an experiment of ten years the township system was legislated out of existence and in its stead was introduced the present system of three supervisors, which is virtually the same as the first board of county commissioners. Thus. after years of experimenting, first with a board of one, then with a board of fifteen, we have got back to the original plan, which in all respects is probably the best which can be devised. While it does not leave the management of affairs in the hands of a single individual it still leaves the matter in the hands of a board which can transact business with expedition, and is a body of sufficient dignity and standing to secure as representatives men of intelligence and ability.

EARLY COUNTY OFFICERS AND FINANCES.

     As before stated, the first election was held in August, 1839. This election, it is hardly necessary to say, had nothing of the nature of a political contest. The object was simply to organize the county, and political differences had not yet appeared in the county. But very soon there came a change.
     The citizens were then generally quiet, industrious and peaceable with one another. Occasional differences and disputes arose, which, in the main, were soon overlooked, or forgotten on account of their necessary and mutual dependence for aid and convenience, as well as for common defense in their pioneer homes.

353

Dissensions and enmities, however, began to creep in gradually, as the settlement progressed, and continued to increase in working mischief very much in proportion as the settlement became more independently situated and more exclusive in their devotion to self-interest and advancement.
     This unwelcome spirit of dissension began to manifest itself to the public most clearly perhaps, about the time the proclamation of the organizing sheriff announced the organization of the county, which would create numerous offices to be filled from the ranks of first voters.
     These offices, during the first term, of course, presented no great inducement for being very eagerly sought after so far as salary was concerned; but then they afforded positions of influence and preference, and they might, in the near future, prove very convenient stepping-stones to more lucrative and influential positions; beside, it was no mean thing to be elected to fill the first offices created in the new county. In this regard they afforded considerable inducement for being sought after by those who were at all inclined toward official distinction, and they called forth numerous aspirants.
At that time as well as now, doubtless, there was a good per cent or worthy, influential citizens who, so far as their own, desire for official position was concerned, were entirely disinterested in the political canvass. These persons sought no such positions for themselves, and would not accept one if offered. Public applause and criticism were not at all coveted by them. Nevertheless they were as deeply interested in the welfare of the county as any other citizen, and had a decided preference for those who should receive their votes. They desired to entrust the county government to efficient, trustworthy men, who were willing to assume the responsibility, and capable of conducting it in an efficient and capable manner, while they themselves were content to engage in some other department of the county's progress, more congenial to their tastes and dispositions. On the other hand, there were always enough of those who would accept these official positions - more or less reluctantly or cheerfully - if duly elected, or urged a little to fill them; so that it was soon found the various offices were not sufficient to give each of the aspirants a position. Evidently some of these must gain the honored distinction, while others must be left out, part of whom, doubtless, would be disappointed not a little over their defeat.
     Who, then, of these various aspirants, were the best qualified to fill these several positions? Who had the most deserved claim on the public support? Who were the shrewdest political tricksters and wire-pullers? Who, of all the number, could wield the most extended and effective influence, either by honorable or, it may be, by unfair means in securing the majority vote? These, and many other questions of similar character, would quite naturally arise, even in the minds of early settlers, as the memorable first election day drew near, when they must each receive a decisive answer at the ballot-box.
     Washington county has been somewhat fortunate in its selection of officers. Most of them have been very good men and the standard of excellence as. at first established was high enough for all time to come.
     The office in which the people are doubtless most interested is that of treasurer, because its mal-administration touches the pockets more directly and sooner than any other. But little trouble has been experienced from this source, and we proceed to give an account of it.

354

     One of the first treasurers was Liston A. Houston, whose accounts at the time of his death, showed that he was in debt to the county. Upon retiring from office the accounts remained unsettled, and prior to his death many efforts had been made to arrange the difficulty.
     The first record concerning the matter was made on the 8th of October, 1845, when Jonathan H. Wilson, at that time county treasurer, made his report to the county commissioners of his investigation of the accounts of Mr. Houston. It appearing from this report that Mr.. Houston's accounts were $1,500 short, the treasurer was instructed to collect that amount from the bondsmen, who were allowed until the first Monday in January, 1846, to make full payment; the time was afterward extended till April.
An exhibit of the receipts and expenditures of the county which first appears on record, was made on the 17th of January, 1842, for the year 1841. It was as follows:

Notes and cash for sale of lots in the town of Washington. . . . $ 2505.35
Taxes levied...........................................388.65

Total: $2844.00

Expenditures for the town of Washington. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1432.16 1/2
" "" county" ............1531.68

Total: $2953.84 1/2

Deficit of 1840 ................................$447.89
Deficit of 1841 ,.................................662.42

Total: $1110.31

     From a report published on the 15th of July, 1857, by Joseph R. Lewis, acting county judge, we get the following items:
Total resources of county: $ 20994 87
Total expenditures of county: 1474832

Excess of resources: $ 624653

The salaries of the county officers were:

Judge: $737.75
Treasurer and Recorder.................................... 737.75
Clerk of Court............................................737.75
Prosecuting Attorney: 287.14
Sheriff ..............62.25

Total: $2562.64

     The next case of difficulty in money matters occurred with Samuel M. Cox, who was treasurer and recorder from 1857 to 1859. In the investigation of this case, we find the following report of a committee, which fully

355

explains this matter, as well as gives a good idea of the finances of the county at that time:
     "In accordance with a resolution passed by the honorable board of supervisors at the regular session of January last, we, the members, appointed a committee to investigate the financial condition of the county from the year 1856 to the 1st of January, 1861, including the settlement of the late treasurer, beg leave to make the following report:
"The most of the financial operations for the fiscal years of 1856, 1857, 1858 and 1859, being resumed in the balance sheet made out between S. M. Cox and the county judge at the beginning of January, 1860, your committee went to a long and careful examination of said settlement, and in their final resume came so near to the general result obtained by the county judge and the late treasurer, that they took it as a basis upon which all other calculations could be rested to the satisfaction of the county, the late and the new treasurer.
     "Our footings of the delinquency of 1856, did somewhat vary from the settlement with Cox, as we in our rural simplicity, took down as delinquent all that was not marked paid; but we were afterward apprised, to our satisfaction, that accounts which had a simple cross or a vulgar fly speck in the margin, had been paid by the late treasurer, and so the said variance was fully explained, if that primitive manner of keeping books remains unjustified.
     " Your committee while in session was apprised that several citizens, whom our present treasurer with laudable zeal had somewhat dunned for the payment of long standing delinquencies, had exhibited receipts for said taxes signed by S. M. Cox or his deputy. We were also apprised by our present treasurer, that treasurer's certificates signed by Cox had been presented for payment of county taxes which he had, of course, to receive.
     "In order to enable your committee to make a final settlement with the late treasurer who offered to account for said receipts and certificates by his attorney, your committee issued from five hundred to six hundred circulars to the residents of the county who appeared to be delinquent on the tax lists of 1856, 1857 and 1858, requesting them to pay or show their receipts, if they had any. A goodly number answered the call and handed in their receipts, for which our treasurer gave duplicates. Others claimed to have paid but have lost their receipts, but offer parol testimony for proof and others less fortunate are willing to be qualified to the fact they allege. Your committee is of the opinion that if the county should fail in the prosecution for taxes in the latter case above referred to, then could said amounts also be recovered against the late treasurer. But your committee forbears any suggestion on the matter. Your committee regretted very much to be unable to reach the non-residents by circulars, as possibly among them some also hold receipts for delinquencies, that Cox has not accounted for.
     "You will find the differences existing between S. M. Cox and the county up to the 3d of May in an agreed statement, made between your committee of the first part, and J. R. Lewis, attorney for S. Y. Cox, of the second part, with all the reserves as to further discoveries in Exhibit A.
     "Cox has collected the following amounts for which he has not accounted:

356

ON TAX LIST OF 1856.

County $ 79 80
State . 55 54
Road 34 74
Bridge 36 73
     Upon which amounts interest is to be collected from June 1st, 1857; at the rate of six per cent.
ON TAX LIST OF 1857.

County $ 76 54
State... 103 86
Bridge ... 28 25
School 55 34
Upon which amounts interest is to be collected from July lst,1858, at the rate of six per cent.
ON THE TAX LIST OF 1858.

County $ 6 15
State .......................................................................................4 24
School……………….... .............................................27 32
Schoo1-house , .........4 05
District ,........16 92
Railroad _ ......35 22

ON TAX LIST OF 1859.

County $ 6 15
State.....................................................4 24
"School ..............................................2 83
School-house..............................................15 92
District..................................................1 41
Railroads.................................................5 44
Treasurer's certificates .....................................152 03

     "The total amount of these delinquencies of Mr. Cox is $821.48, with interest to be added as specified in the above exhibit.
     "There was an unwillingness manifested by Mr. Lewis to account with and pay to the county the collection of State taxes unaccounted for by Cox in the tax lists of 1856, 1857, 1858 and 1859, but as the law of 1858, and its legitimate offspring of 1860 make the county responsible to the State for said amounts, a special resolution of your boad [board] may be needed to obviate any difficulties that might arise from that difference of opinion.
     " Your committee would further observe that on road tax of 1856 we brought out the late treasurer delinquent for the taxes collected and unaccounted for to the amount of $81.97, and on the road tax of 1857 to the amount of $75.57, but he got the liability of 1856 entirely canceled and that of 1856 reduced to $34.84, as shown in our exhibit, by the production of some receipts of the year 1857, amounting to $122.78, which he had

357

mislaid at the time of settlement, and which were now, by your committee, on examination, received in payment, duly canceled and filed with your clerk,
     "We suggest the propriety of an order to the treasurer under the supervision of your committee, to credit on the tax lists of the proper year, the accounts of those persons who have surrendered their road receipts, and an order to the clerk to credit on the treasurer's books the road account of the treasurer with the aggregate amount.
     The same committee made a report of the county expenses from July 2d, 1860, to December 31, 1860, a period of about six months, from which it appears that the current expenses for the county during that time amounted to $5,085.48 as follows:
Township clerks and trustees $150 80
District court... 956 66
Elections ... 290 48
Roads............ 31 00
Sundries .........70 55
Stationery, blanks and books . . .. . .. . . ... 495 85
Paupers............ 385 27
Criminal prosecutions before justices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 00
County judge's salary. . . .. . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . .. .. .. . . . :.. . . .. .. 475 00
Treasurer's salary ..................475 00,
Clerk's salary .................475 00
Sheriff's salary.................... 90 00
Deputies' salary ..................... 115 58
Keeping prisoners................. 319 79
Wolf scalps .......................16 00
District attorney ..................147 50
Attorneys in R R suits ................172 25
Per cent paid to Greene & Stone .................100 00
Abstract of land entries ................150 00
Interest on county orders .................7 89
Balance against treasury .................96 85
     While not as much, by far, as at present it was an alarming increase over the expenditures as given in January, 1842, whereas the total expenses of the county for the year 1841 amounted to 312,953.34; while the expenses of the county for the last half of the year 1860 amounted to $5,085.48.
     In comparing the expenses of the county we must bear in mind that while the expenses of $2,953.84, in 1841 grew to the sum of $5,085.48 for the last half of the year 1860 that in that time the population of the county increased from about sixteen hundred in 1841 to over fourteen thousand in 1860; and while the entire taxable personal property of the county in 1839 was but $28,025 it; amounted in 1860 to $935,915.
    In treating of the finances of the county in early times it is thought expedient to insert the

Return to top