r r PUBLISHED BY THE FRONTIER PRINTING CO. SUBSCRIPTION, SI .60 PER ANNUM. D. H. CRONIN E DITOR AN D M AN AGE R. VOLUME XXII. O’NEILL. HOLT COUNTY. NEBRASKA, OCTOBER 24, 1901. NUMBER 17. • ’ * t SWIPES OVER $40 FRO! COUNTY IN ONE CASE On May 18, 1899, the county of Holt, through W. R. Butler, county attorney, begun its action against the Chester County Guarantee Trust & Safe Deposit company and others, No. 5264, A to foreclose its tax hen for taxes for the years 1892 to 1897 inclu ' . sive against SE )/x section 30, f township 32, range 15, amounting to $42.70, and the NWx/x section, 27, township 31, range 15, amounting to $103. Decree was entered for these amounts $145.70, August 8, 1899, and for court costs $69.38. Included in the court costs was $45 for pub lishing the notice to non-resident defendants, published by George A. Raker, son-in-law of John A. Trommershausser, candidate for county clerk, and editor of Peoples’ Advocate of Ewing. On December 5, 1899, an order of sale was issued and de livered to the sheriff, vvho apprais ed the 320 acres of land on De cember 7, for $400, and caused a notice of the sheriff’s sale to be published in the Atkinson Plain Dealer at an expense of $15, and on the 8th day of January, 1900, sold the NVV^ of 27-31-15 for ^ $150. The SE of 30-32-15 was not sold for the want of bidder. The return of the sheriff shows that the fees charged in this case by him were $79.50, divided as follows: Against S E 30-32-15.*34 Oft Against N\V 27-31-15. 14 ft3 Total.*79 50 The following is an exact copy of the items of sheriff costs as charged and returned by the sheriff: Northwest quarter 27-31-15 — ITEMS OF SHERIFF'S COSTS. Four certificates. $5 40 Making levy . 2 00 Calling appraisers. 50 Swea ingappraisers. 50 Fees of appraisers. 12 00 Copy of appraisements. 2 00 Advertisement of sale. 25 Cost wf publication . 7 50 Making sale. 4 00 Commission on sale. 4 50 Return on sale...!. 50 Making deed. 1 00 Acknowledging deed. 50 Mileage. 3 40 Keveune stamps. 50 Total costs of sale:.$44.55 Costs of $44.5^ held out of proeeds. (3igued) John M. Stewart, Sheriff. Southeast quarter 30-32-15— ITEMS OF SHERIFF’S HOSTS. Four certificates. $ 5 40 Making levy. 2 00 Calling appraisers. 50 Swearing appraisers. 50 Fees of appraisers. . 12 00 Copy of appraisements. 2 00 Advertisement of sale. 25 \ Cost of pub ication . 7 50 Making sale ...... Commission on sale... Return on sale. 60 M.iking deed.. Acknowledging deed.. V. Mileage. 4 30 Total costs of sale.$34.95 Costs held out of proceeds $34.95. (Signed) John M. Stewart. Sheriff. The distance from O’Neill to the northwest quarter of 27-31-15 MR. ECKER RRANDS THE “HALL NOTE" WITH A HOT IRON omcE or j. c. ECKER INSU RANCE DIXON, NEB., Oct. 18, 1901. STATE OF NEBRASKA, ) , Dixon County, \ SS‘ J. C. Ecker, being duly sworn, upon oath says that on the 14th day of April, 1890, he borrowed from Barrett Scott personally and alofte and for his own exclusive use and benefit, the sum of $75; that on that day he gave to Mr. Scott his note due six months after date, signed by himself and Mr. C. E. Hall; that Mr. Hall signed the note with him as security and at his personal request and as a personal favor to him; that Mr. Hall had nothing to do with the borrowing of the money from Mr. Scott and did not receive one cent of it directly or indirectly. My attention has been called to what perports to be an exact copy of a note given by myself and Mr. Hall to Mr. Scott, in the Holt County Independent of October 18, and that I am satisfied it is the same note I have referred to; that this is the only note I ever gave Mr. Scott or that Mr. Hall ever signed with me; that I used the money for my own personal benefit and that Mr. Hall had no interest in it whatever or in any way. I make this statement in justice to Mr. Hall. J. C. ECKER. Dixon County, State of Nebraska. Subscribed in my presence and sworn to before me this 19th day of October, 1901. [Seal.—Commission expires May 3, 1904.] C. STIMSON, Notary Public. & & J* To Whom It May Concern: In explaination of the note given to Barrett Scott by myself as principal and C. E. Hall as surety in 1890, I will say that any one that says that Mr. Hall benfited in any way from that transaction, simply tells a falsehood. He signed the note simply as a friendly act to me, and as I left Holt county that year he had no means of knowing the note had not been lifted. Anyone blaming him for anything in this particular transaction is doing him great injustice, and I desire to have the matter set right in the minds of all fair people. J. CHECKER. O’NEILL, Oct. 21, 1901. E. S. Eves, Editor Independent: Sir: In your issue of Oct. 18, you charge that I borrowed from Barrett Scott $75, and published a note to Scott given by J. C. Ecker and myself. I said before you published the note that I never got one cent from Barret* Scott personally, or as treasurer, directly, or indectly. I now repeat that statement. Mr. Ecker got the money’ every cent of it. I had nothing to do with ii except to sign the note as surety for him. You also published last week an alledged conversation between Mr. Waterman, administrator of the Scott estate and myself. As to that I have to say that no such conversation ever took place, nor did he ever talk with me about the note and the alledged conversation is absolutely false and untrue. C. E. HALL. fjT IS 1 ardly worth while for I IA The Frontier to add anything j to the above plain statements of j Messrs. Ecker and Hall. Mr. ; Ecker, it will be remembered by : those who passed through the ■ stormy days of the Scott defal- ■ cation and heard the rumblings : of discontent that preceeded those : days, was a democratic editor in j Holt county, having been con- ; nected with tjie O’Neill Sun and ; ; editor of the Minneola Sun. Since j : leaving O’Neill Mr. Ecker has ■ j also edited a populist newspaper, • : the Dixon Index. Attention is : ; called to this to correct any idea : : that may have gotten into the • • minds of some that Ecker was a j < republican. £ | The publication of the mess in j : last week’s Independent was in j: ■ entire harmony with the popu- : • list mode of campaigning in this • : county at present. The wonder ■ j is that the desperate gang of : • character assassins and plunder • : mongers didn’t erase Mr. Ecker’s ; : name from the note and have : : Hall’s appear alone. The alleged : ; dialogue between Waterman and j • Hall is about the calibre of the ; brain of the upstart from Amelia. : I The Frontier doesn’t know what Mr. Hall intends to do about it, • but if we were accused in that • manner the author of it would : ; either publicly retract every word : : of it or go to the pen if there be ■ : justice in court. The Independent is working | : itself into a sweat to elect a pop t ^wvvwvwvwvwwvywwYyvyyvvwvyvvvwy ywmnrHwwwwwwwwwutAAAMAAAAAAAAAAiVAiSAAAAAAA {sheriff and its alleged editor has : (been heard to say: “If we lose ; sheriff I will have to quit busi- : ness.” This may account for the ■ : intimate relation between the In- ■ : dependent, the sheriff’s office and ; the land syndicate — it lives by ; : plunder. The present sheriff’s : : deputy—a member of the inner j ■ circle and a man of many shadey 1 : transactions (read his history) | ; —aspires to be sheriff. Is it ■ : reasonable to expect anything : | better from him in public life than ; he has shown in private business? : < The record of the republican • 5 candidate for this office is open ; | to the inspection of the public ; | and it shows an infinitely better ; 5 man for a position of public | 5 trust. Vwvwwwwww vwvwwwwvwwvvwwvv by section line is thirty-three miles, and the distance from this land to the southeast quarter of 30-27-15 is seven miles, making forty miles necessarily and act ually traveled by the sheriff in going to the land, and the same number in returning to O’Neill, making a total of eighty miles traveled altogether by the sheriff for which the law, section 3091, allows him to charge 5 cents per mile for each mile actually and necessarily traveled for making a levy and appraisal of real estate; or, in this, case $4. He charged, however, for 154 miles, or $7.70. To prove this the mileage charg ed, $7.70, divide by five, and you have the miles charged for, or 154 miles. By this item of mile age he robs the county of $3.70. In this case the sheriff appraised the land in forty acre tracts and offered it for sale the same way. By what authority did he do this? The decree of the court did not so direct, neither did the order of sale. By selling the land in forty acre tracts the sheriff conceives the idea that it is necessary to get eight certificates of incumberance from the county treasurer, for which the law, section 6081» allowed the county treasurer $1 each and perhaps 10 cents reven ue on each certificate. Stewart paid the treasurer $8.80 and charged $10.80, mak ing a steal of $2 more. Mr. Stewart, will you please tell the tax payers why more than one certificate was necessary? Could not the treasurer have stated in one certificate the taxes against the land in forties? This would have cost $1.10 and saved the county $9.70. The sheriff was entitled by law, section 3091, to charge for making the levy in this case 50 cents and return 50 cents. Notice that he charges $4 for making the levy and $1 for making return on sale. Here then, is $4 excess fees charged and taken from the county with out authority of law on these two items. This land was all apprais ed on the same day by the same appraisers, and for call ing the appraisers and swearing them the statue, section 3091, allows the sheriff to charge 5° cents. Notice his charge: Call ing appraisers, $1; swearing ap praisers, $1. Another swipe from the county of $1.50. The statute provides that be fore the land can be sold by the sheriff it must be appraised by two disinterested free holders* and section 6103 fixes the com pensation of the appraisers at the the sum of 50 cents each for each (Continued on Fourth Page.) “Who Killed Cock Robin” During this campaign The Frontier has refrained from in dulging in personalities reflecting on the individual candidates on the populist ticket, and it is with some reluctancy that we deviate from this established rule in this issue. We have made the cam paign so far on the issues as pre sented by the platforms of the re spective parties in convention assembled. The paramount issue in the republican platform is the system of tax foreclosures being carried on by a conspiracy exist ing between the pop papers, some c‘ the county officers and a cote rie of character assassins and land pirates that are plundering the county and robbing helpless peo ple of their land. In our exposi tion of the high handed official dishonesty and corruption that permeates the entire system we have taken the official records for every statement, and stand ready to back up these staments by the records as made by the populism officials of this county. We have believed and still believe that this is what the tax payers of the county are interested in. But we have been unable to hold the populist papers and gang of land pirates to a discussion of this sub ject. They have invariably re sorted to personal abuse of repub licans and fallen back on their stock aigument of the Scott de falcation, which is familiar to ANOTHER "TELL-TALE EVIDENCE" i O keA^//y/s- - ^ O^i oCesT^^ctsisissi <*£^-<>vv-£' FAC SIMILE OF NOTE GIVEN SCOTT BY DAN CRONIN. every citzen of the county. It is the only argument the gang has, however, and it is to them like Banquo’s ghost, “it will not down.” Driven by the desperate situation in which they find themselves, they seek to detract the attention of the people from their own stealing of county money and peoples’ lands; the Independent last week printed a scandalous article accusing Charley Hail of receiving some of the county money from Scott when it knew that Hall only signed the note as surity and did not receive one dollar from Scott. If the corrupt gang were really honest and sin cere in their efforts to enlighten the public as to who really did borrow money from Barrett Scott why do they not publish some of the evidence of this fact they have against some of the populist candidates fox* county office? It is a notorious fact that as many populists in this county borrowed money from Scott which they did not pay back as republicans. Thinking this gang of character assassins and land pirates, in their mad rush to grab more land and pi-inters’ fees have over-looked some of the “tell tale evidence” we reproduce here with a fac simile of a little docu ment prepared by the hand of D. J. Cronin, populist candidate for county treasurer, and given to Barrett Scott, and suggest that from the evidence presented the tax payers draw their own con clusions as to whether the popu list or republican candidates re ceived a “swipe” of Holt county money.