Kansas Historical Quarterly
County Seat Controversies
in Southwestern Kansas
Henry F. Mason
February, 1933 (Vol. 2, No. 1), pages 45 to 65.
Transcribed by Lynn Nelson; HTML editing by Tod Roberts
digitized with permission of the Kansas Historical Society.
Numbers in brackets refer to footnotes for this text.
THE county
seat struggles in the southwestern counties of Kansas during
the later eighties were but a particular phase of the
general town-building boom of that period. The peculiar
features of that singular phenomenon were perhaps more
strikingly presented in that longitude than farther east.
The disproportion between anticipation and realization was
greater there than elsewhere, not because speculative values
rose higher, but because they fell further. In other parts
of the state the situation was the familiar one of an era of
abnormal activity, followed by one of corresponding
depression. While improvements were made and public expenses
incurred far in advance of existing needs, the movement was,
generally speaking, only premature. Conditions were present
which required only time to justify, perhaps, the wildest
predictions of the most enthusiastic optimist. But in the
western end of the state the fact was sadly otherwise. The
vast tide of immigration which started in 1885 and
overflowed the short-grass prairies clear to the Colorado
border and beyond was the result of a belief that every
quarter section represented a farm -- 160 acres of as good
agricultural land as the sun ever shone upon, sufficiently
watered by nature's beneficence to produce crops year after
year with only such an occasional failure as might be looked
for even in the most favored region. This belief prevailed,
notwithstanding that earlier unsuccessful attempts at
settlement seemed to teach the contrary in unmistakable
terms. It was urged that drought was no more to be feared
then than it had been a few years before in eastern Kansas.
It was said that the climate had changed, that cultivation
of the soil had favored the retention of moisture and
thereby increased evaporation, which in turn promoted
further precipitation. The expressive epigram of the
time
1.
Justice Henry Freeman Mason was born in Racine,
Wis., February 17, 1860. He was graduated from the
University of Wisconsin in 1881. In 1886 he came to
Kansas and opened a law office in Garden City.
After serving two years as city attorney he was
elected county attorney of Finney county in 1889
and served four years. He represented the county in
the legislatures of 1899 and 1901, serving as
chairman of the judiciary committee in the latter
year. In 1902 he was elected to the supreme court
of Kansas and remained in that body until his death
on May 4, 1927. In 1919 he was awarded the degree
of doctor of laws by Washburn college. --
Twenty-sixth Biennial Report, Kansas Historical Society, p. 83. [The paper printed
here was read a number of years ago by Justice
Mason before the Saturday Night Club of Topeka,
without any thought of publication. It is published
through the courtesy of Mrs. Henry F. Mason, of
Topeka.]
(45)
46 THE KANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
was "the rain
follows the plow." The theory that the general enlargement
of the crop area in the longitude of eastern Kansas had
tended gradually to push the eastern boundary of the
semiarid belt farther west was at least entitled to serious
consideration. But it was soberly argued that the amount of
sod newly turned had within a twelve-month produced a
revolution of physical conditions. This vast plain, that had
dried and baked in the winds and suns of centuries, had been
here and there scratched with the plow of the settler, and
the idea was not too grotesque for general acceptance that
this infinitesimal disturbance of its surface had worked ,a
miracle worthy of omnipotence. The few cattlemen who scoffed
at the proposition were discredited as having a manifest
interest in discouraging immigration, in order that they
might continue to range their herds at will over this wide
expanse of priceless pasture. Schemes for irrigation were
frowned upon because it was thought that they would tend to
frighten timid investors by advertising a distrust of the
sufficiency of the natural rainfall to insure the rewards of
husbandry.
This was the
state of public opinion when occasion arose for the
organization of new counties carved out of the territory to
which these remarks apply. In a few of them there were towns
of such size and situation that opposition to their being
made county seats was so evidently hopeless that their
designation as such was acquiesced in by common consent. But
in most cases there was no one town having any apparent
advantage in that regard over others then existing or that
might be established. In a considerable number of instances
there were no towns whatever, and the field was open to any
handful of speculators to acquire a site and enter the
campaign with a reasonable prospect of success. In such
circumstances it was natural that there should be many and
vigorous controversies over the selection of county seats,
and that the value of the prizes at issue should be greatly
overestimated. As an illustration of this I recall that C.
J. Jones, who delighted in the sobriquet of "Buffalo Jones,"
on being remonstrated with for his recklessness in becoming
involved in some six or eight of these affairs, justified
his course by saying that he could afford to lose in all of
them but one; that if in any single instance the town which
he was backing became the county seat he and his associates
would not only from their profits be able to recoup their
losses in all their unsuccessful efforts, but would have
enough left to make them independent for life.
MASON: COUNTY SEAT CONTROVERSIES 47
A problem
that has received considerable attention and has never been
satisfactorily solved, is why the men who were engaged in
these contests, most of whom were of at least average
standing as citizens, and many of whom in all the ordinary
relations of life -- social, political and commercial --
were of exemplary conduct, were willing to lay aside every
conscientious scruple and to countenance, if not to indulge
in, bribery, intimidation, ballotbox stuffing, subornation
of perjury, and kindred offenses in support of the prospects
of the town of their choice. One reason, no doubt, was that
the belief that large financial interests were involved
tended to soothe the pricks of conscience. Another was the
development of a spirit of partisanship more violent than
that engendered by any but the bitterest of political
struggles. Another was a variation of the adage that the end
justifies the means, expressed in the aphorism that it is
necessary to fight the devil with fire, it being said, and
doubtless believed, that every villainy resorted to was
merely an offset to the unconscionable devices of the
opposition.
There was
little in the means adopted to assist nature in securing
results in these contests that had sufficient novelty to
merit special attention. The prevalent methods included the
importation of illegal voters, direct and indirect bribery,
stuffing of ballot boxes, forging of election returns, and
coercion of electors by actual or implied threats of
violence into voting against their wishes or remaining away
from the polls. Quasi legal colonization schemes were nearly
universal. Additions to town sites were platted and lots
given to so-called actual settlers who would use them as the
bases of claims of residence until after the election. To
provide for the immediate needs of these pampered pioneers
various devices were employed. Public improvements, such as
the building of bridges and roads, were undertaken by county
and township boards, bonds were issued for such purposes,
and the proceeds were turned over to the campaign committee
for use for the good of the cause. A simpler device
available to the faction having control of the existing
county government was to utilize it as a warrant factory --
turning out warrants nominally for legitimate claims, such
as the employment of attorneys, but really to swell the
corruption fund. These warrants, illegal and void in
themselves, were later transmuted by the alchemy of
refunding into valid obligations of the municipalities
issuing them. To these practices is due the fact that many
of the southwestern communi-
48 THE KANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
ties are
burdened with vast indebtedness but have no public
buildings, roads, bridges or property of any kind to show
for it.
In Gray
county the candidacy of the town of Ingalls for the county
seat was due to the ambition of A. T. Soule, [2] who
had been made a millionaire by the advertisement and sale of
"Hop Bitters," to have a county seat of his own as a sort of
toy to beguile his idle moments. As an aid to his project he
built a railroad from Dodge City to Montezuma which, for
want of anything to carry, was afterwards torn up, and the
Eureka Irrigating Canal, which was a great work of
engineering and lacked only one thing to make it a
glittering success, namely, water. His efforts added greatly
to the circulating medium and raised the local per capita
distribution to an abnormal figure.
In Grant
county the Ulysses people established a thoroughly
businesslike system, by which voters were paid at the rate
of ten dollars apiece as they cast their ballots, the rights
of each party to the transaction being protected by
appropriate checks and counter checks. It seemed a perfectly
fair method, for under it every one received just what he
bargained for, but it failed to meet the approval of the
supreme court and the election was set aside on account of
it.
In the mere
matter of adding names to the voting lists and putting
corresponding ballots in the box no great amount of
originality was ordinarily shown. The election officers
usually lacked even imagination enough to invent fictitious
names, but had recourse to old city directories and to the
pages of ancient and modern history. In one instance,
however, a degree of ingenuity in this regard was exhibited
that is perhaps worthy of mention. The election officers
carefully prepared a list of all the persons who had at some
time lived in the vicinity, but had moved away. They wrote
their names on the poll books as having voted, but in each
instance made some slight variation, such as the change of
an initial. The beauty of this method was that if in a
contest it was claimed that a given name was fictitious,
evidence could be produced that its bearer was known in the
community. If, however, conclusive proof were made that the
particular person indicated did not vote, then attention
could be called to the fact that the name was not the
same.
A great
amount of litigation resulted from these controversies, much
of it being settled in the supreme court. The disputed
ques-
2.
Asa T. Soule of Rochester, N. Y., manufacturer and
financier, was brought to Kansas by J. W. and G. G.
Gilbert. He died in 1893.
MASON: COUNTY SEAT CONTROVERSIES 49
tions were
for the most part those of fact rather than of law, and
their decision contributed little to the development of our
system of jurisprudence. However, in Martin v. Ingham and
State v. Martin, 38 Kan. 641, growing out of the contests in
Grant and Hamilton counties, the supreme court for the first
time considered the doubtful, difficult and interesting
question of how far the judicial department of the state
government might interfere with the executive branch, and
held that the court had the power in certain cases to
control the action of the governor, either by mandamus or by
injunction, although in particular instances it declined to
do so. Another decision by which the literature of the law
was enriched was that rendered in State v. Commissioners of
Seward County, 36 Kan. 236, where it was held with becoming
caution that a secret canvass of the vote cast at a
county-seat election, made by two members of the board of
commissioners without notice to the third, or to anyone
else, held on the open prairie at three o'clock in the
morning by the light of the moon, without poll books,
ballots or tally sheets, and without any record being made
at the time, was "not only irregular, but
invalid."
The most
picturesque, if not the most effective, of the reprehensible
campaign practices referred to was the employment of
mercenaries technically known as "killers." These were the
real and imitation "bad men" who frequented Dodge City. The
purpose in enlisting their services was in part, wherever
practicable, to overawe opposition by the mere terror
inspired by their fearsome reputation, and in part to have
them in readiness for the carrying out of any desperate
project that might require physical courage and the utter
disregard of all restraints of the law. They formed a
recognized part of the machinery of the ordinary county seat
fight. They commanded good pay, were treated with the
greatest deference, and fairly lived in clover while the
wars lasted. Their presumed value was graduated by the
nearness of their approach to the conventional type of
frontier ruffian -- the "Alkali Ike" of the funny papers.
While they were all thugs, toughs, and sure thing gamblers,
only a few of them had in fact done anything to earn the
right to be considered dangerous characters. The rest were
vain pretenders. Their presence was believed to be, and
doubtless was, a menace to the peace of society, but in fact
they did little to earn their wage and, generally speaking,
their part in the drama was confined to the moral effect of
their presence-the immoral effect, perhaps I should say. It
is true that one of them, while awaiting orders for
active
50 THE KANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
service, did
shoot and kill an inoffensive citizen, and upon the earlier
reports of the affair it was assumed that the tragedy was
the outcome of an election fight, but it turned out that the
killing was entirely accidental -- an unlooked-for and
unpreventable casualty, such as continually occur, which,
however regrettable, afforded no just ground for impugning
the motives of the unfortunate instrument -- the involuntary
agent of an inscrutable Providence. It seems that it had
been his purpose, animated by a mere exuberance of animal
spirits, as a matter of pleasantry, to shoot a hole through
the hat of a bystander -- a form of practical joke of high
repute in the cow-boy days. But through no fault of his own
-- probably by reason of unsteadiness of nerve occasioned by
an inferior quality or an excessive quantity of liquor --
the bullet ranged low and perforated the brain as well as
the hat of the victim. In justice to the survivor it must be
said that he appreciated to the full his error, regretted
its distressing consequences, and made every reparation in
his power by tendering most ample apologies to the friends
and relatives of the dead man. Of course, this closed the
incident. What more could William Tell have done had his
arrow been similarly deflected?
There were
undoubtedly times in the history of each one of these
controversies when conditions were ripe for physical
encounters of the most desperate character -- when a slight
disturbance might have precipitated a general slaughter.
There were times when frightful consequences were narrowly
averted. Looking back, even after the few years that have
passed, it is difficult to realize the serious character of
situations which in retrospect suggest comic opera rather
than tragedy. One concrete instance may serve to illustrate
this. In Grant county the contending towns were Ulysses and
Appomattox. The former had the advantage of the earlier
start, the better location and the more abundant "sinews of
war." As the day of test drew near the confidence of its
partisans increased and the spirit of doubt was more
manifest in the opposing camp. In this situation a day or
two before the election two of the leading supporters of the
claims of Appomattox -- members of the town company --
conferred with the Ulysses managers and entered into a
written contract by the terms of which it was agreed, among
other things, first, that neither side should resort to
bribery or any other wrongful method to influence the
result; and second, that upon whichever banner victory might
perch, the successful town company should reimburse its
defeated rival for the expenses incurred
MASON: COUNTY SEAT CONTROVERSIES 51
in the
attempt to build up an opposition town, which should
thereupon be abandoned, all interests then to unite in the
upbuilding of the place selected as the county
seat.
Upon its face
this agreement was perfectly mutual and entirely
commendable. Its provisions were not intentionally made
public by the parties to it, perhaps through fear of
misconstruction. But in some way knowledge of its substance
leaked out at Appomattox shortly before the polls closed. In
an atmosphere of suspicion and distrust which was the usual
accompaniment of such controversies, it was not strange that
the transaction should have been looked upon as a selling
out of the interests of the town -- a giving up of the fight
by the managers in consideration of being themselves
protected from loss. At all events that was the
interpretation that was placed upon it by many of the
Appomattox boomers. A crowd collected and the men accused of
treachery were taken into custody and placed under guard. It
soon developed that upon the face of the returns Ulysses had
received a large majority of the votes cast in the county.
This intensified the ill feeling already existing. The
rougher element of the town's population, inflamed alike by
the contemplation of their real or imagined wrongs and by
the indulgence in frequent potations, clamored for summary
vengeance and proposed that the prisoners pay the penalty of
their offending with their lives. It required the utmost
diplomacy on the part of the cooler heads to prevent the
immediate carrying out of this plan. A variety of ingenious
expedients were resorted to by them to give rise to
discussion and so gain delay. Matters remained in this
condition for over twenty-four hours, during every moment of
which the lives of the imprisoned men were in imminent
peril. As the excitement gradually subsided it became
possible to consider proposals for appeasing the wrath of
the leaders of the mob. It was finally agreed that the
captives should be freed upon their making provision for the
repayment to their captors of the amounts the latter were
said to have expended in behalf of Appomattox in the course
of the campaign. A schedule of such amounts was accordingly
prepared and the prisoners, glad of relief upon any terms,
drew checks upon their home bank for their payment. Money
was advanced upon a part of the checks by the local bank,
the funds were distributed and the imprisonment ended. None
of the checks were ever paid, but the Appomattox bankers
recovered judgment for such of them as they had cashed. This
episode doesn't sound very thrilling in the telling. Perhaps
this is due to a lack of graphic talent in the narrator.
The
52 THE KANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
average
reader of the newspaper refuses to become excited over the
familiar statement accompanying the report of some revolting
crime that "it is rumored that the perpetrator will be
lynched if caught." And it may be that in the case mentioned
the danger of violence was not so great as it seemed. Still,
no doubt on this point was ever entertained by those who
were most directly concerned.
It was a
noticeable feature of the turbulent times under
consideration that the expected catastrophe seldom or never
happened. In spite of the constant preparation for battle,
perhaps because of it, the opposing forces seldom or never
met in physical strife. If human life was ever intentionally
taken in the course of a struggle for a point directly
involved in any effort for the location of a county seat, I
do not know of it. The fight at Coronado on February 27,
1887, in which three Leoti people were killed and several
others badly wounded, is usually accounted such a case, but
I think improperly so. While it was in a sense an outgrowth
of the ill feeling generated by the rivalry between the
opposing towns, it bore no direct relation to the issue
between them. The participants were not struggling to gain
any advantage for their locality. Of course there are two
versions of the affair, and they are so absolutely
conflicting that it is a hopeless task for one having no
personal knowledge of its details to form a satisfactory
judgment as to the real facts. This much is obvious and
undisputed -- at a time when Coronado and Leoti were engaged
in a campaign preceding the selection of a county seat, and
while the excitement incident to such a situation was at
fever heat, a party of the adherents of Leoti went to
Coronado, where a battle ensued in which three of the
visitors were killed outright and others were badly wounded.
This is the story as told by the Coronado people: The Leoti
party came to their town for the express purpose of causing
trouble; they were drunk, quarrelsome and abusive; they
visited upon inoffensive citizens all manner of indignities;
they forced them to dance for their amusement, promoting
activity in the exercise by firing bullets from their
revolvers through the floor near the feet of the performers.
This conduct was borne by the residents until endurance was
no longer possible, when an effort to stop it brought on a
general engagement. The record of at least one of the men
killed -- Jack Coulter -- was such as to lend plausibility
to this tale. He was a cowboy who delighted to be known as a
desperate character and strove to live up to that
reputation. The local tradition is that his trigger finger
continued to twitch for half an hour after his
death.
MASON: COUNTY SEAT CONTROVERSIES 53
Of course,
the essential features of the Coronado version were denied,
but this important fact is beyond dispute -- if the Leoti
folk came upon any legitimate errand whatever, it was not
one having any relation to the county seat matter. Whether
the homicides were felonious, justifiable or excusable, they
were not committed in any effort to make Coronado the county
seat, and were only indirectly attributable to the rivalry
between the towns. A number of arrests were at once made,
the militia being called out to keep the peace. The
defendants waived preliminary examination and were placed in
charge of the sheriff of Finney county to await trial. After
a few days their restraint was only nominal. In a short time
they applied to the supreme court to be let to bail,
alleging that their waiver of examination had been due to
fear of violence. Upon a hearing in which the merits of the
case were pretty thoroughly gone into they were released
upon bond. The final disposition of the case was somewhat
singular. The defendants asked for a change of venue, upon
the ground that a fair trial could not be had in Wichita
county. Over their protest the case was transferred, not to
another county of the judicial district, but to a county
situated in a different district. There they raised an
objection to being tried outside of the district where the
homicide was committed, which was held good by the district
court and also by the supreme court on appeal. This ended
that prosecution, and the whole matter having then become an
old story no further arrests were made.
A fatal
shooting in Gray county would form an exception to the
statement made, but for the fact that it was said to be, and
probably was, entirely accidental, in the sense that the
person who fired the shot had no purpose to injure the one
who was killed. This was the only occasion upon which the
"Hessians" were called upon to perform the peculiar services
for which they were supposed to be especially employed. The
county seat was temporarily at Cimarron. An Ingalls man had
been elected county clerk. It was conceived to be a
brilliant stroke of strategy for him to proceed to Cimarron
with sufficient assistance, take forcible possession of the
records of his office, and remove them to Ingalls. An
expedition was organized with this in view. A dray guarded
by a select band of ruffians was driven into Cimarron and up
to the door of the court house, where the work of loading up
the archives was at once begun. Perhaps if any considerable
degree of tact had been employed no physical resistance
would have been made. The hireling assistants
54 THE KANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
had been
sworn in as deputy sheriffs and were nominally acting in
that capacity. Had this pretense of legal procedure been
kept up it is possible that there would have been an effort
to meet it only by recourse to the machinery of the law. But
the haste and lack of ceremony with which the invasion was
conducted stamped it as a forcible ravishment rather than
the peaceful assertion of a lawful right. Before the
spoliation of the office could be completed the citizens of
Cimarron had resorted to arms and opened up a lively fire
upon such of the invaders as were outside of the building,
with the result that, without stopping even to rescue two
members of the party who remained inside, the driver whipped
up and made a quick retreat back to Ingalls. The two thus
abandoned took refuge in the second story of the court
house, where they remained at bay, responding by a desultory
fire to the fusillade that continued for some time from the
street. It was in the course of this more or less aimless
shooting that a peaceable resident of Cimarron, who was
standing perhaps a hundred feet from the building, was
killed. The two prisoners were held in captivity until the
next day, their captors in the meantime, so it is said,
making every effort to compass their destruction. Their
friends in Dodge City, learning of their desperate plight,
began preparations for a rescue party. But wiser counsels
prevailed and, chiefly through the intervention of residents
of Ford county who had the confidence of the leaders of each
faction, peace was restored. In course of time, after the
passions aroused by the unfortunate occurrence had
measurably subsided, the members of the Ingalls party were
brought to trial upon the charge of murder, the attorney
general conducting the prosecution. The result was an
acquittal. While, of course, this was unsatisfactory to the
Cimarron element, it was recognized everywhere that the
trial had been a fair one, and the result was accepted as
final and acquiesced in with better grace than might
reasonably have been expected.
But, although
no lives were lost in the collision of the opposing forces
upon the direct issue of the location of any county seat of
southwest Kansas, there grew out of the Stevens county
contest a series of assassinations worthy of a Kentucky feud
or a Sicilian vendetta. In 1885 practically the first
settlement in that county was made at Hugoton, and plans
were at once formed to make that place the county seat. In
the preliminary steps that were taken for the speedy
organization of the county with this in view, there is no
room for doubt that the grossest fraud was practiced. This,
how-
MASON: COUNTY SEAT CONTROVERSIES 55
ever, would
probably have passed unchallenged but for the arrival upon
the scene of Sam Wood. [3] He, with his friends,
started the of Woodsdale, and in its interest began legal
proceedings to prevent the premature organization of the
county. The Hugoton people regarded him as an interloper,
maliciously seeking to interfere with what they considered
their firmly established vested rights.
The first
sensational incident, which was to be followed by a long
line of tragedies, was the kidnapping of Wood. To get rid of
him for the time being, until the pending efforts for
effecting a temporary county organization could be carried
out, the Hugoton supporters caused him, in August, 1886, to
be arrested, upon a warrant charging him with libel. Bail
was refused and he was placed in the charge of several
guards and taken out of the state and into what is now
Beaver county, Oklahoma. To account for his absence it was
given out that he had been induced by the payment of a sum
of money to abandon his fight and had gone into the
territory on a hunting trip. This report was not for a
moment credited by his friends. A party was organized to
search for him. On their way south they found a note
secretly penciled by Wood and thrown upon the trail. Thus
assured that they were upon the right track, they increased
their speed and shortly overtook and surrounded Wood's
captors, who yielded to superior numbers and surrendered.
The tables thus being turned Wood organized a triumphal
march to Garden City, metaphorically dragging his kidnappers
at his chariot wheels. Civil and criminal proceedings were
begun against the Hugoton leaders upon charges of conspiracy
but were permitted to slumber and were finally dismissed
without trial.
The
proceedings brought to prevent the organization of Stevens
county would probably have been successful but for a counter
movement. In the legislative session of 1887 an act was
passed legalizing the steps already taken, and the effect of
the pending litigation was thus evaded. The fight for the
county seat then proceeded, Hugoton being temporarily
successful. The next disturbance grew out of an election to
vote bonds for a railroad which Woodsdale favored and
Hugoton opposed. In a meeting held in May, 1888, at a
neutral point -- Voorhees -- for the discussion of this
issue, a minor altercation took place, in which Sam
Robinson, the, marshal of Hugoton,
3.
Samuel Newitt Wood was born at Mount Gilead, Ohio,
December 30, 1825 and removed to Kansas in July,
1854. He settled on a claim near Lawrence and
immediately became an acknowledged leader of the
free-state party. In 1859 Mr. Wood went to Chase
county, and was sent to the territorial legislature
from there in 1860-1861. In 1861 he was a member of
the first state senate, and was four times a member
of the state legislature. Mr. Wood established the
first newspapers at Cottonwood Falls and Council
Grove, and two newspapers in Woodsdale. He was
killed on June 23, 1891.
56 THE KANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
assuming to
act as a peace officer, struck the under sheriff with his
revolver. Nothing more serious took place at the time, but
within a few days a warrant was issued against Robinson,
charging him with assault and battery, and placed in the
hands of Ed Short, the marshal of Woodsdale, and a constable
as well. Short proceeded to Hugoton where he seems to have
attempted to arrest Robinson. At any rate, the two men
engaged in a gun fight in which each emptied his revolver
without injury to either.
The railroad
bond election had in the meantime been held, but the vote
had not been canvassed. There was a dispute as to the
regularity of the returns in one precinct, and it was felt
that a conflict could hardly be averted at the time of the
canvass unless protection should be afforded from the
outside. The sheriff wired Gov. John A. Martin asking that
militia be sent to preserve the peace. Brig. Gen. Murray
Myers was at once sent to the scene of hostilities to
examine and report. He found each town a fortified camp, the
inhabitants fully aroused and ready and willing for a
general engagement. Believing that bloodshed was imminent he
brought on two companies of militia and disarmed the
belligerent forces. The canvass of the election returns
having been completed, the excitement having subsided, and
the intended arrest and prosecution of Robinson having
apparently been abandoned, the militia was withdrawn, having
been in camp from June 19 to June 24. In writing to Sam Wood
as mayor of Woodsdale, General Myers took occasion to
comment upon the unwisdom of the placing of the warrant for
Robinson in the hands of Short.
A month
passed by without fresh incident and it might well have been
supposed that there was no danger of further trouble. But on
July 22 Short was at Voorhees and there learned that
Robinson was with a picnic party in the neutral strip.
Returning to Woodsdale he procured the assistance of several
friends and started in pursuit of him. The two parties came
together, but Robinson mounted a race horse and made a
temporary escape. Short and his companions followed and
succeeded in surrounding Robinson, but feeling the need of
more help in effecting his capture sent to Woodsdale for
reinforcements. [John M.] Cross, the sheriff, with
four others, responded to the call and started in search of
Short but, not finding him, stopped for the night at a
haymaker's camp near Wild Horse Lake, a depression in the
prairie in which storm waters gathered. In the meantime,
Robinson's friends had reached Hugoton, organized a rescue
party, and returned to the strip in quest of him.
He,
MASON: COUNTY SEAT CONTROVERSIES 57
having
escaped the vigilance of Short, met and joined the rescuers.
Shortly afterwards they came upon the camp where Sheriff
Cross and his men were asleep. Then ensued what came to be
known as the Haymeadow Massacre, in which four of the Cross
party were killed and the fifth wounded and left for dead.
According to the Hugoton account, this was the result of a
running fight, but by the report of Herbert Tonney, the one
member of the Woodsdale party who survived, which was
corroborated by the haymakers and seemingly by all the known
circumstances, the victims were taken by surprise, captured,
and shot down in cold blood. Nothing can be said in
extenuation of the act, yet it is but fair to add that the
murdered men were not clean handed. The encounter was
primarily of their own seeking, and in that sense they were
the aggressors. They had followed Robinson into the neutral
strip with the unlawful purpose of kidnapping him, for
obviously the warrant in the hands of Short conferred no
authority to make an arrest outside of the state. Moreover,
apart from any technical consideration, the effort to follow
up the prosecution of Robinson lacked the appearance of good
faith, for if the interests of society were thought to
require it, the time to have undertaken it was while the
militia were still on the ground and the power of the state
could have been had in support of any laudable endeavor to
enforce the law.
The militia
was again called out and the community practically placed
under martial law. Arrests were made and then the remarkable
fact was developed that apparently no court had jurisdiction
of the crime. The territory within which it was committed,
popularly known as "No Man's Land," had seemingly been
overlooked in providing for the administration of justice in
the federal courts. Colonel Wood charged himself with the
duty of bringing the assassins of his associates to trial.
He devised a reasonable theory for finding jurisdiction in
one of the federal courts of Texas. It was not necessary to
test that theory, for congress by new legislation placed the
jurisdiction there. In time a trial was had, ending in a
conviction. This result was due in a large degree to the
persistence and energy of Wood, acting as a voluntary
assistant to the prosecuting office. Upon review the
jurisdiction of the trial court was upheld, but a reversal
was ordered by reason of a manifest error which can only be
accounted for by supposing that the judgment of the
attorneys in charge of the prosecution was clouded by their
zeal. At the time of the homicide the then
58 THE KANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
attorney
general of the state, S. B. Bradford, [4] made a
personal investigation of its circumstances, visiting for
that purpose Stevens county and the haymeadow camp, and
getting all the information possible at first hand. He made
a written report of his conclusions to the governor in which
he expressed the unqualified opinion that the killing was a
deliberate murder. Mr. Bradford's term of office having
expired, he was retained to assist in the defense. He was
not called as a witness by the defendants, having indeed no
such personal knowledge of the facts as to make him
competent to testify. But the prosecution called him for the
government and asked him if he had not made such an
investigation and report as those just described. He replied
that he had, but that the report was based upon hearsay
evidence which he later discredited. Upon this obviously
insufficient foundation the prosecution introduced in
evidence the report to the governor made by Bradford as
attorney general. Upon the hearing in the supreme court it
was confessed that this proceeding was error requiring a
reversal and a new trial was ordered. The attorney general
of the United States became convinced that the district
attorney had at least lacked discretion in the conduct of
the case -- that he had given too much leeway to Colonel
Wood in its management, and he was on that account removed.
Energetic and finally successful efforts were then made to
have the prosecution discontinued, and so far as the courts
were concerned the matter ended there.
The next
personage to become involved in the imbroglio was Theodosius
Botkin. [5] In 1889 six counties in the southwest
corner of the state, into only one of which a railroad ran,
were erected into a judicial district. Gov. [Lyman
U.] Humphrey appointed Botkin judge on the score of old
personal friendship, in spite of protests made on the ground
of his well-known tendency to over indulgence in drink. His
election followed in the same year, Sam Wood being one of
his supporters. Botkin had been concerned in the county-seat
contest in the neighboring county of Seward, but was not
directly involved in the Stevens county trouble. His
unpleasant re-
4.
Simeon Briggs Bradford was long prominent in Kansas
politics. In 1875 he represented Osage county in
the legislature and in 1880 was elected county
attorney of Osage county. He was elected
attorney-general of the state in 1884 and was
reelected in 1886. In 1898 he became a United
States commissioner in the Indian territory. He
died at Ardmore, I. T., April 2, 1902.
5.
Theodosius Botkin was born in Clarke county, Ohio
June 25, 1846. In 1865 he came to Kansas, settling
in Linn county. He was admitted to the bar in 1875
and served as probate judge of the county and
police judge of Mound City. He was appointed judge
of the thirty-second district in March, 1889, and
removed to Stevens county. He resigned this
judgeship October 11 1892 and settled in
Hutchinson. Reno county elected him to the state
legislature in 1896. In 1901 he moved to Salt Lake
City, Utah. He was serving as U. S. consul at
Campbellton, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, when he
died, May 27, 1918.
MASON: COUNTY SEAT CONTROVERSIES 59
lations with
Wood began in 1890, either through Botkin's candidacy for
congress or through a disagreement in court, or through both
of these matters. Botkin was intolerant of opposition. Wood
was, in a way, rather easy-going but would fight and fight
hard in self defense. The character of the men was such that
it was inevitable that the feeling between them should
become intensely bitter. Botkin was a man of much native
ability and good education. He was lawyer of no little
strength. He understood legal principles and mew how to
apply them. Granting that he was not corrupt, and even
leaving out of account the fact that he was a drunkard and a
gambler, his administration of the judicial office was
foredoomed to failure. He was by temperament a partisan. He
could scarcely witness a dog fight without taking sides. He
could not hear the most ordinary law suit, even if
disinterested at the start, without becoming biased upon one
side or the other. And as in each of the counties composing
his district the county seat controversies had left bitter
animosities, he straightway become involved in factional
quarrels.
Next to his
instinct of partisanship Botkin's most unfortunate
characteristic was the extent to which he carried the
doctrine of judicial notice. The accepted formula is that
courts will take cognizance without proof of whatever is a
matter of common knowledge. Judge Botkin did not stop at
this. He took notice not only of all that was publicly known
but of much that was only privately suspected. If he failed
to take official cognizance of everything that occurred in
his district the omission was more than compensated for his
taking judicial notice of much that never did occur. He was
continually making orders based upon what he himself stated
to be vague rumors. Upon such information he would order the
county attorney to institute prosecutions, arraign offenders
before himself to answer as for contempt, disbar attorneys,
and imprison citizens for what amounted to lese majesty. The
newspaper man who ventured any criticism of his conduct, on
or off the bench, was likely to be haled before him to
answer for his temerity in a summary proceeding peculiar to
that jurisdiction -- a curious blend of court martial,
examination for contempt, and prosecution for criminal and
libel. The lawyer who with reasonable vigor tried a case
before him for a client with whom the judge was out of
sympathy was deemed to have achieved a triumph of forensic
skill and diplomacy if he escaped being committed to the
county jail.
Naturally
enough Botkin soon reduced his district, already
suf-
60 THE KANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
ficiently
distracted by the tumultuous confusions of local war, to a
state of anarchy. Yet, strange to say, he attracted
adherents even among some of the most respectable residents.
In every community there was a sharp division into factions.
But this division was no longer along county seat lines. It
was into Botkin and anti-Botkin parties. Sam Wood gradually
came to be regarded as the anti-Botkin leader, and against
him were directed all the influences controlled by Botkin.
Attempts were made to arrest him at Topeka upon charges
lacking in any reasonable pretense of good faith -- but, as
Wood no doubt conscientiously and not unreasonably believed,
for the purpose of taking him among his enemies with a view
to his assassination. Then came the session of the
legislature of 1891, Wood being officially clerk of the
judiciary committee of the house and actually the ruling
spirit of that body, the majority of which were populists,
as he was. Botkin was impeached, and the impeachment was
tried by a senate all members of which, save two, were
Republicans. Although a majority voted for conviction, the
requirement of a two-thirds vote to convict caused a failure
of the prosecution. Botkin was acquitted but not
vindicated.
Aside from
the general accusations of drunkenness and petty tyranny,
the principal charge against him was based upon his conduct
with reference to the finances of the city of Springfield.
Bonds of that municipality had been issued for the
construction of water works. The bonds had been sold and the
proceeds partially expended for that purpose. Disputes arose
with reference to the validity of a part of the proceedings
in relation to the matter. In March, 1890, Judge Botkin made
a written order reciting that complaints of the conduct of
the city council had come to his notice, and that it had
been represented to him that the county attorney had refused
to institute proceedings against them and requiring that
officer to do so at once or to show cause why his office
should not be declared vacant and he himself be attached for
contempt. Shortly after this the county attorney began an
action to enjoin the city officers from recognizing in any
way the validity of the bonds referred to. A temporary
injunction was allowed. The city at the time had on hand
cash to the amount of about $7,500. According to his own
statement, Judge Botkin, having heard street talk to the
effect that his injunction might be disregarded, feared that
this sum would be improperly expended if vigorous measures
were not taken to prevent. He, therefore, upon his own
motion made an order in the pending action appointing a
receiver to take charge of this fund.
MASON: COUNTY SEAT CONTROVERSIES 61
A few weeks
later the action was dismissed, "with prejudice," and the
receiver was discharged, having in the meantime paid out
with the approval of the court over $5,250 for attorneys'
fees for which no visible services had been rendered either
to the city or to the receiver. Such a transaction was
obviously incapable of palliation or excuse, but a number of
senators justified their votes against conviction by
attributing it to bad judgment, free from any wrongful
motive. Comment would be superfluous.
During the
session of the legislature Wood had been arrested upon a
charge of bribery and had given bond for his appearance at
the term of court in Stevens county, which began June 23,
1891. About the middle of the forenoon of that day Wood,
accompanied by his wife and a Mrs. Carpenter, drove into
Hugoton and to the door of a church where Judge Botkin was
holding court. An adjournment was taken until two o'clock
just before Wood reached the building. Wood entered it for
the purpose of examining some records. While he was inside
the judge and most of the court attendants left. Jim Brennan
walked out at the front door and stood waiting until Wood
came out, when he pulled a revolver and shot him in the
back. Wood started to run around the corner of the building.
Brennan followed him and shot him again in the back. All
this was in the presence of Mrs. Wood and Mrs. Carpenter. A
crowd gathered quickly. Wood was carried into the church,
where he died in a short time. Brennan had been a witness
for the defendants in the trial of the haymeadow murderers,
and his evidence had been sharply criticized by Wood in his
argument to the jury in that case. This was given out as the
occasion for the assassination. Personal enmity doubtless
had a place in inspiring this atrocious murder, but there
were many circumstances that tended to lend probability to
the theory, which was generally accepted by Wood's friends,
that it was the result of a wide-spread conspiracy to which
Botkin was actively or passively a party. Brennan was taken
into custody, but only a half-hearted attempt was made to
prosecute him. It was realized that it was impossible to
find a sufficient number of qualified jurymen for the trial
of the case in Stevens county. Only a few hundred men were
eligible for jury service there and these, almost without
exception, had been identified with one or the other of the
contending factions. But had the fact been otherwise, had
the county had a dense population of disinterested and
dispassionate citizens, the very publicity of the butchery
would still, under the curious application sometimes made of
the law in this state, have
62 THE KANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
disqualified
all of them that had sufficient intelligence to form an
opinion. After one or two futile attempts at a trial Brennan
was discharged.
In 1911
another effort was made to bring him to trial, the increase
in the population of Stevens county by immigration seeming
to justify a belief that a qualified jury could be obtained
there. He was arrested upon extradition papers in Oklahoma,
but was released on habeas corpus upon the ground that
having submitted himself to the process of the Kansas courts
and been discharged he was not a fugitive from justice. The
soundness of the decision is open to question, but it is not
without support in the authorities.
The
miscarriage of justice resulting from a failure to procure a
jury naturally added to the popular distrust of the
machinery of the law. It was believed by a large proportion,
if not by the majority, of the people of the six counties
composing the district that the judge was capable of every
crime in the calendar and guilty of most of them, and that
he was supported in his iniquity by the state
administration. It had been seen that murder could be done
in his district, almost in his presence, with impunity if
not with judicial sanction. A reign of terror followed. No
man felt his life or his property to be safe. No man dared
appeal to the law for the protection of either. Just what
plots and counter-plots were formed will probably be left to
a later generation to discover. Rumors were rife of
oath-bound bands leagued :for the destruction of Botkin. In
December, 1891, word was brought to him of a definite plan
to kill him while on his way to hold court at Springfield in
the following month. It came through one who professed to
have taken part in the deliberation of the plotters. It
received scant credence, partly because many similar reports
had proved unfounded, partly because of the emotional
character of the informer. Nevertheless, it undoubtedly
resulted in saving Botkin's life. On the 5th of January,
1892, court was to be opened at Springfield. The judge lived
some three miles south of the town. By reason of the warning
mentioned the sheriff with a posse was sent to reconnoiter
the route thither just about daybreak. From a ravine lying
near the road the party was fired upon and Sheriff
[Sam] Dunn was killed. The killing was not through
mistake. Although it is beyond doubt that Botkin was the
victim primarily sought, Dunn himself was extremely
obnoxious to the anti-Botkin element and was unquestionably
slain on that account. Other members of the party could
easily have been killed or captured, but were permitted to
escape.
MASON: COUNTY SEAT CONTROVERSIES 63
Botkin
immediately turned his residence into a military camp.
Pickets were thrown out, arms accumulated and a state of
siege was established. All persons approaching were halted,
examined -- and, if it was thought advisable, searched. None
was permitted to pass the outposts except after giving a
satisfactory account of himself and his errand. Botkin wired
the governor for assistance. Militia was promptly sent to
his relief. He cursed the authorities for sending him
soldiers instead of merely furnishing him with guns. His
conduct for a few days led those who saw him to entertain
the gravest doubts of his sanity. His words and actions were
hysterical. Yet there was method in his madness. After the
presence of the militia had apparently restored peace and
removed the fear of further violence, the officer in command
suggested that as he was there for the purpose of protecting
the court, and as the protection offered was ample, there
was no reason why the business of the term should not be
proceeded with. But Botkin stubbornly refused to open court
and as stubbornly declined to give any reason for delay. The
reason which he afterwards assigned was this-a contest was
pending for the office of sheriff; the candidate favored by
Botkin was the contestor, his opponent having received the
certificate of election; but it was understood that a
decision was shortly to be rendered and that it would be in
his favor. Judge Botkin's purpose in postponing from day to
day the opening of court, as expressed to his friends, was
in order to give his candidate time to get from the contest
court a certificate of election in order that he might be in
a situation to proclaim the opening of the district court
and thereby obtain the benefit incident to being recognized
as the de facto sheriff. Arrests were made of men
supposed to have taken part in the killing of Dunn, but the
impossibility of obtaining a jury led to the discontinuance
of the proceedings. There are men still living in the
vicinity who avow personal knowledge that the purpose of the
ambuscade was to take the life of Botkin, who justify such
purpose, and are at little pains to deny their own
participation in it. Botkin came to Topeka shortly after the
new homicide and, realizing that he was generally felt to be
in a large degree responsible for this and other recent
troubles, issued a formal statement justifying his acts,
which bore a distinct family resemblance to the traditional
defense made by Jim Lane to the charge of the murder of
Jenkins. The statement in type occupied two newspaper
columns and was little
64 THE KANSAS HISTORICAL QUARTERLY
more than a
labored attempt to prove that the widow of Sam Wood was with
the party that killed Dunn.
Whether
through fear of a more successful attempt upon his life, or
by reason of pressure brought by his friends, Botkin
concluded to resign, delaying only until thirty days before
election, in order that his successor might hold for a year
by appointment instead of only until the next general
election. He removed to Hutchinson and was a member of the
Kansas house of representatives in the session of 1897. He
seems to have been regarded by his colleagues in that body
as an elderly gentleman of mild manners and inoffensive
disposition. How far the continuance of the condition of
strife, disorder and crime throughout the district, which
originated in the county seat quarrels, was due to his
personal influence can be judged from this -- from the hour
of his retirement there has been no more peaceable and
law-abiding community in the state of Kansas or out of it,
than that of the old thirty-second district. There and in
the neighboring counties the passions excited in those
troublous times have passed away. There may still linger
here and there traces of the suspicion and hatred then
engendered, but they are not obtruded. The effect of the
debauchery of the public conscience then accomplished may
not have wholly disappeared, but its display is
rare.
The era of
turbulent strife ended as suddenly as it began. Where the
subsidence of the struggle found the county seat located
otherwise than in its natural place a change was later
effected practically without opposition. In Hamilton county
at one time Coolidge, Kendall and Syracuse each claimed to
be the county seat, and each maintained a full set of county
officers and assumed to transact the county business. One
who wished to pay taxes, or to begin a law suit, had to
guess at his peril which was the de jure or the de facto
government. Syracuse, the central town, was obviously the
only place where the public would have been satisfied to
have the county seat permanently established, and there it
was finally placed. In Kearny county while the fever was
raging Hartland succeeded in winning the coveted prize from
Lakin; but after conditions had reverted to the normal a
change was made by an overwhelming vote. In Gray county
Soule's money ravished the county seat for Ingalls. In their
haste to get it back the Cimarron people proceeded without a
strict regard for the legal requirements and omitted some of
the conditions precedent to a valid election. Nevertheless
an election was held and the records and offices were
transferred in accordance with the vote cast. The Ingalls
contingent carried the matter to the
MASON: COUNTY SEAT CONTROVERSIES 65
district
court but were denied relief. On appeal the decision was
reversed, but in the meantime interest in the matter had
become so lax that no one ever undertook to follow it up,
and Cimarron has ever since remained the de facto county
seat by mere common consent, although de jure the title is
doubtless still in Ingalls. In Seward county Springfield won
in the bitter fight there waged, but when Liberal, from its
position on the railroad, became the business center of the
county it was soon naturally and inevitably made the center
of government as well.
It is said
that assassination never changed the course of history. It
did not do so in this case. Probably no single county seat
in any of the counties in the region referred to is now in a
different place from what it would have been had there been
no boom, no frenzy of town building, no controversy, no
bribery, no frauds, no murder. The losses of life and
property incurred in the effort to influence such locations
were net. No tangible beneficial results to any one remain
to be placed against them. The outrages upon humanity and
decency were ineffectual, and this is fortunate, for it
makes it easier to regard the whole disgraceful episode as
the hideous nightmare that it was and to speed it on its way
to oblivion.
Home | Kansas Historical Quarterly List of Articles, 1931-1977
|