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.
