H
2d
Frontier.
VOLUME XXIV. O’NEILL. NEBRASKA, THURSDAY, OCTOBER 15. 1903. NUMBER 16,
RECORDS CONVICT HARRINGTONS!
I [The following exposition and exposure of certain things which the
tax payers of the Fifteenth judicial district, and especially of Holt
county, ought to know before they can vote intelligently at the com
ing election, was published in our issue of October 1, and is published
herewith, in connection with some further evidence in the nature of
I a reply to a very lame denial offered by Mike and Judge Harrington in
last week’s Independent. The greatest of care has been taken in the
examination of the records and nothing appears in either article but
what can be substantiated in full.—-Editors.]
y^ EADERS of The Frontier are somewhat familiar with the
1^* warfare we have waged in exposing official corruption that
i V, has been associated with the tax foreclosure system that
was conducted in this county. If the tax foreclosures had
been conducted in this county as they have in other counties in
the district, with the sole view of enforcing the collection of taxes,
The Frontier would bf the last to complain.
As we have shown on previous occasions, the tax foreclosure
business in this county has been perverted into a gigantic scheme
to grab land and extort fabulous printer’s fees ou non resident
notices, which notices alone amount to over $14,000 in a space of a
little over two years, and the Independent, of which E. S. Eves
and M. F. Harrington are the principal stockholders, has received
most of the swag.
By far the largest source of revenue to the members of the land
syndicate is the means the tax foreclosures has afforded them in
getting title to so much land at very little expense by railroading
the foreclosures through post haste before non-resident land own
ers, in many cases, were aware that any action was pending against
their land.
Not the least among the manipulators of the graft in this county
is Judge J. J. Harrington of the district court. For the purpose
of showing his connection, to some extent, with the extensive oper
ations, a few cases in point are here referred to:
Case No. 5501 of Holt county vs. C. F. Bliven for the west half
southeast quarter and south east quarter southeast quarter section
thirteen, township thirty three, range fourteen, 120 acres. This
case was commenced by the county attorney August 17, 1899, for
delinquent taxes amounting to $01.85. On April 28, 1900, Sheriff
Stewart sold the land to Judge J. J. Harrington for the munificent
sum of one dollar—Judge Harrington personally bidding the land
in—in the name of M. H. McCarthy, of the real esaate firm of
McCarthy & Harrington, the sheriff’s deed made to M. H. Mc
Carthy, a record of which can be found in deed record 00, at page
528 of the records of this county. On April 24, 1900, the day
after Judge Harrington bid the land in for one dollar, he, as Judge
of the District Court, confirmed the sale of this land that was bid
in by himself the day previous. A record of this confirmation can
be found in district court journal No. 19, at page 39. On May 5,
1902, the land was deeded to Jennie Mullen, an aunt of County
Attorney Mullen, and the title now stands in her name, a record of
which can be found in deed record 60, at page 527. By this trans
action they got 120 acres of land clear for one dollar and the county
lost its taxes amounting to $61.85. (The taxes have not been
formerly cancelled on the treasurer’s books but all that is necessrry
to cancel them is to get the certificate from the clerk of the district
court showing the deficiency judgment in the tax foreclosure.) Iu
addition to this loss of the taxes, the county was -made to pay the
costs in the case amounting to $48.71, and Judge Harrington has
not seen fit to reimburse the county even to the extent of the costs,
notwithstanding more than three years have elapsed since he pur
chased the land. The actual loss to the county in this transaction
is $110.56, and Judge Harrington, or the syndicate, got 120 acres
of clear land for one dollar.
Can any tax payer of this county figure out where this transact
ion has been to the interest to the county? Yet Judge Harrington
has the brazen effrontery to sit upon the district bench and confirm
this sale made to himself the day previous.
The records of the county clerk’s office show that since March,
1,899, Judge Harrington has sold $63,825 worth of Holt county
real estate, say nothing of the several hundred acres he still owns
that he has not yet disposed of. This is referred to simply to show
something of the extent of his real estate operations since he has
been on the bench.
I After there had been filed over 500 tax foreclosures in which the
county was made plaintiff and so much of the land being sold,
similiar to the case above referred to, to members of the O’Neill
land syndicate at prices that would not pay the costs and taxes
charged against the .laud, and the county would thereby lose the
taxes and in many cases the costs, it then became evident to the
board of supervisors of this county that the system of tax foreclos
ures was being used by the land pirates, in league with certain
officials, for the purpose of 9xtortiug exhorbitant printer’s fees,
charging as high as $75 for a non-resident notice, and robbing
helpless people of their land. Then it was that the board of super
visors, by resolution, put a stop to the system of county tax forex
closures. This order of the board had the effect of saving the
county from further loss of taxes and payment of costs, but it did
not put a stop to the gang taking the property of people without
their knowledge or consent. Then it was that the machinery of a
subservient judiciary was brought into play for the purpose af sand
bagging people and taking their property from them under the
guise of legal proceedings. It was then that Judge and Mike Har
rington conceived the idea that an individual could buy a tax sale
certificate against a piece of property from the county treasurer
REPLY TO JUDGE AND MIKE HARRINGTON ^ I
(The reply or attempted denial of
the above charges againts Judge
Harrington appeared in the last
V ,5lJ issue of the Holt County Independ
, ent and has been scattered broad
I: cast over the district. It is needless
I to say, the “defense” was written
If by Judge and Mike Harrington.
|| We are glad they have seen lit to
II circulate their ’‘defense” through
|| out the district and hope every in
i' telligent voter received a copy,
t Those unacquainted with condi
I tions in this county may thereby
judge how depraved are the politi
cal morals of the populist ringsters
of this county. We are astonished,
however, that men of the supposed
political sagacity of the Harring
tons would put forth such an abor
tive effort in defense of the specific
charges we have made against
Judge Harrington. True to the
professional insticts of an attorney,
who has a bad case, he has written,
denied and expatiated on many
things of which he was not charged
and have no bearing on any of the
(The:
charges we have made against him.
With the exception of a general
denial, the only statement in the
whole defense that has any bearing
on the specific charges made is the
statement from ex-Sheriff Stewart
that Judge Harrington bought no
land at tax foreclosure sale while
he was sheriff. For the benelit of
those wdio may not know ex-Sheri if
Stewart and his connections with
the land syndicate, and his motive
in making a false statement, we j
will say that two years ago when i
eader will find “Reply to Judge and IS
we first exposed the ollicial corrup
tion in connection with the fore
closures he refused to allow the in
spection of the records of his office.
Our charges then as now were
proven well founded. Stewart re
tired from office a defaulter and
was compelled by the board of sup
ervisors to pay into the county
treasury several hundred dollars he
had unlawfully collected from the
county in tax foreclosure cases. To
completely shatter the only semb
lance of a denial Judge Harrington
[ike Harrington” concluded on page
has made we here produce two affi
davits which speak for themselves:
AFFIDAVITS
State of Nebraska, County of Holt,
ss.
K. H. Benedict, of lawful age, be
ing lirst duly sworn, deposes and
says that he was present in the
sheriff’s office in O’Neill on April
‘23, 1900, at which time Judge J. J.
Harrington bid in the W4 SE1 and
SEt SEf of section 13, townsiiip 33,
range 14, at ONE DOLLAR, and
instructed Sheriff Stewart to make
the deed in the name ot M. H. Mc
Carthy, whicli sale as is above
eight.)
shown by the district court journal
was confirmed by Judge Harring- j l
ton on the day after the sale. I;i
E. II. BENEDICT.
Subscribed in my presence and «
sworn to before me this 14th day of ?;
October, 1903. J. H. Meredith,
(Seal) Notary Public. [i
State of Iowa, County of Wood
bury, ss. S
E. M. Corbett, being duly sworn,
deposes and says that he was in
O’Neill, Neb., on or about April 23,
1900, looking after the interests of
a client in a piece of land that was
being sold by the sheriff on that
day under foreclosure of tax lien;
today and commence foreclosure proceedings on that certificate
the very next day, without giving the owner of the property any
opportunity to redeem, nothwithstauding the statute and consti
tution of the state gives property owners two years in which to
redeem their property from tax sale. The first of this class of
private tax foreclosures that was filed iu this county was filed
in the name of John C. Morrow, a brother-in-law of Judge and
Mike Harrington, and he was then the office man for the Har
ringtons and working by the month for them. .It is case No.
6303, Johu G. Morrow vs. Mrs. S. H. Porter. On December 21,
1900, the laud was purchased at tax sale from the county treasurer
for the delinquent taxes of 1890,amounting to $13.20, and on Jan
uary 9, 1901, just eighteen days after the date of the tax sale cer
tificate, foreclosure proceedings were commenced on the tax sale
certificate.
To show how the graft has been operated to the personal advant
age and financial interest of Judge J. J. Harrington we refer to but
two of many similiar cases that furnish a strikiug illustration of
how Judge Harrington has been able to accumulate a fortune while
on the bench. In these cases Judge Harrington’s name does not
usually appear ir the proceedings until the sales are confirmed and
then the laud deeded to him. The suits are usually conducted in
the name of Morrow—the brother in-law—or E. S. Eves, the editor
of the Independent, or M. H. McGarthy, of the real estate firm of
McGarthy & Harrington, or some other member of the land syndi
cate. In the two cases we here refer to the proceedings were con
ducted in the name of E. S. Eves.
Case No. 6375, Eves vs. Minnie Hinkle who owned the north half
of north half of 15-30-9—160 acres. On February 26, 1901, a tax
sale certificate was secured in the name of E. S. Eves for the delin
quent taxes of 1899, amounting to $12.68. On March 7, 1901—
nine days after date of tax sale certificate—M. F. Harrington filed
a petition to foreclose the tax sale certificate in the name of Eves.
On July 6, 1901, a decree was entered by Judge Harrington for
$13.12. Order of sale issued on August 12, 1901, and land ap
pra sed on September 2, at $160 by populist Sheriff John Stewart,
his deputy and J. S. Harrington, brother of Judge Harrington.
Land was sold by the sheriff on October 7, 1901, in name of E.
S. Eves for $100.10.
Case No. 0362 of Eves vs. Martha W. Ivinney who owned south
east quarter of 32, 30, 9—160 acres. On February 18, 1901, |
a tax sale certificate was secured in name of E. S. Eves for de
linquent taxes amounting to $17 66. The very next day—Feb
ruary 19, 1901—M. F. Harrington til.'d a petition to foreclose
the tax sale certificate. Decree was entered by Judge Harring
ton for $18.25 on July 6, 1901. Land appraised by Sheriff Stew
art, his deputy, and J. S. Harrington on September 2, 190], for
$160. Lana sold by the sheriff on October 7, 1901, for $106 in
name of E. S. Eves. The day following the sale of both of these
tracts, October 8, 1901, Judge Harrington called a special term of
court for the sole purpose of confirming these sales, together with
two or three other confirmations of a similiar nature, which consti
tuted the work of the special term. Sheriff deeds were issued for
both of these tracts on November 8, 1901, and can be found in deed
records 60 and 61 at pages 370 and 355 respectively. Soon after
the sale of the land by the sheriff to Eves, he deeds the land to
Judge Harrington and the consideration named in the deed is
$2,000, and includes other land, a record of which can be found in
deed record 63, at page 89. This is a part of the land Judge Har
rington sold to Mr. Tigh about a year ago for $15,000, or $15 per
acre. The announcement of this sale was made by Eves through
the columns of the Holt County Independent on October 19, 1902,
in the following manner:
One of the largest land transfers made in Holt county this season was con
sumated last week when Judge Harrington sold his fine ranch sixteen miles
north of O’Neill, consisting of 3,200 acres of choice hay, farming and grazing
land to a party in eastern Nebraska, consideration $45,000 * * * Had
this ranch been improved with a few new buildings and fences it would readily
have brought at least a third more, and the buyer in getting it in its natural
state has cercainly bought a bargain.
Several other quarters in this rauch are tracts on which tax fore
closures had been commenced and the land then deeded to Judge
Harriugton. A record of the sale of this land by Judge Harring
ton to Mr. Tigh can be found in deed record 67, at page 501.
The facts in connection with the tax foreclosure sale of the two
tracts of land above referred to presents this spectacle:
The land was owned by two women of New York state, Martha
W. Kinney and Minnie Hinkle; one a widow, the other a single
woman, both of rather indigent circumstances who had their sav
ings invested in these lands. They by oversight neglected to pay
the taxes on their land for 1899. Judge Harrington owned land
adjoining and desired to add these two quarters to his holdings at
a nominal expense. The machinery of his office is here brought
into play. A tax sale certificate is secured against the land on Febru
ary 18, 1901, and the very next day M. F. Harriugton, as attorney,
commences foreclosure proceedings which are railroaded through
with all possible speed by special sessions of the court in which the
decrees are entered and sales confirmed by Judge Harrington, the
man who is after the land. The law provides that before land can
be sold by the sheriff it must be appraised and cannot be sold for
less than two thirds of the appraised value. Section 6079 of the
1897 compiled statutes of Nebraska, provides: •
“Whenever, hereafter, execution shall be levied on any lands and
tenaments, the officer levying the same shall call an inquest of two
disinterested freeholders -and such officer together with said free- i
holders, shall appraise at its real value in money, and such ap- j
praisement shall be signed by such officer and said freeholders, <
respectively.”
Precaution was taken to see that the land was not appraised too I
high. Another member of the family in the person of J. S. Har- {
rington was called in to look after this part of the proceeding. He
was selected by Sheriff Stewart as one of the “disinterested” free
holders to appraise the land his brother Judge Harrington was
getting. The sheriff, his deputy and J. S. Harrington appraised
both of these pieces of land on September 2, 1901, at one dollar !
per acre. On the land owned by Minnie Hinkle, 15, 80, 9, there f|
was was loued $1,500 in July, 1889, and which was foreclosed and g
sold at sheriff’s sale on May 22, 1896, for $2,425, a record of which |
can be found in deed record 45 at page 328. Both of these |
are good pieces of land and the loan and previous sale by the t
sheriff are referred to, to show something of the actual value of the
land and how supremely ridiculous was the appraisement of the '
land at one dollar per *aere and the sale of the land by the sheriff .
at sixty two cents per here, which Judge Harrington can turn
around aud sell within one year at $15 per acre. Of course all
these proceedings were conducted unbeknown to these poor women.
They were non residents of the state and knew nothing of the
proceedings against their land; did not even know that the taxes f
on their land were delinquent. Their first information was
that they had lost their land by foreclosure and sheriff’s sale and |
that the land was now owned by Judge Harrington. Any one at
all familiar with the laws and rulings of the supreme court of this
state would know that the title held by Judge Harrington was
absolutely void and would be set aside if taken to the supreme r
court. No one knew this better than Judge Harrington, but with
his title based on this bogus foreclosure he was in position to say f
“I own this land,” aud he then dictated terms on which he would
give a nominal sum for a quit claim deed to the land from the
legal owners. This he did after considerable negotiations, and the
poor women were made to understand that in order to recover title |
to their laud they would have to hire counsel and caary their cases
to the supreme court. They realized, as any intelligent persons
would, the disadvantage tney were at, lawing at a great distance
and especially with a judge of the district court, and rather than g
be at such expense aud. trouble they were advised to and did
accept from Judge Harrington a nominal sum for a xuit claim deed
to their land. Martha W. Kinney was, on October 80, 1902, given
$75 for a deed to the southeast quarter of 32, 30, 9, a record of
which can be found in deed record 66, at page 355, and on Ootober
31,1902, Judge Harrriugton gave Minnie Hinkle $50 for a quit
claim deed to the north half of the north half of 15, 30, 9, a record
of which can be found in deed record 66, at page 438.
The law provides that in foreclosures, owners of the land may
redeem from decree or judgment and sale any time orior to the
confirmation of the sale by the court. It is very evident that
Judge Harrington did not want to take any chances of any one
coming in aud redeeming from these sheriff sales, for on the very |
next day, as it has heretofore been shown, he called a special term
of court to confirm these sales, thereby shutting out any redemp- \
tion of the land.
Section o /, Chapter l'J, at page ood or the compiled statutes or
Nebraska, it is provided:
“A judge or justice is disqualified from acting as such ir any
case wherein he is a party or interested, or where he is related
either party by consanguinity or affinity within the fourth degree.”
Notwithstanding this plain provision of the statute, Judge Har- j j
rington has with impunity, not only entered decrees, confirmed j
sales and made all kinds of court orders in cases in which his I
brothers and other relatives are intersted but in which he is per
scnaly interested, as has heretofore been shown.
The facts are as the record plainly show that the whole tax fore
closure system as it has been conducted in this county has been in
collusion and in the interest of the land syndicate of O’Neill and
has been permeated with fraud and corruption from start to finish. j
The cases here referred to are by no means all of the cases of a 1
similar nature in which Judge Harrington had a personal interest. 1
A similar reference to all of the cases iu which ho had a personal |
interest would require too much space. We have referred to the
above cases somewhat minutely and iu detail, giving the book and
page where the record can be found and if any voter in this county
doubts any statement we have made as to what the records show,
we will pay th« expences of any such person to O’Neill if we cannot
prove the records as we have here represented them.
This is au appalling state of affairs, and one in which the gen
eral public would be very unwilling to believe were it not that the
public records prove beyond question of doubt the truthfullness of
tne charges.
These charges are not made against J ugde Harrington with any
feeling of personal animosity. We have no quarrel with him. When
an officer seeks re-election his official record becomes a proper subject 4
of inquiry, and it is not only the priviledge, but the duty of any elec- g
tor to investigate the record of such official. The public generally
have great respect and reverence for the judiciary. Judge Barring- g
ton, by his official acts, wherein his financial interests have been at §
stake, has struck a rude blow at public reverence and respect for the |
judiciary in this district. Be has. to say the least, dishonored the
igh office he holds and cannot, in the lace of his official recoid,
. :riousIy hope for a re-election at the hands of the intelligent voters
of this district.