and the state's early organization was fashioned and molded by that influence, and the old baronial system had been perpetuated through the slave power where necessity required a centralizing. To abolish this one man power and disburse it among the many was looked upon by the southern element as dangerous in the extreme, and considerable bitterness was engendered when a change was demanded.

"Party lines were thrown down, and former influences and surroundings controlled the vote."

All these things may be so; and still the numerical preponderance of southern stock in Iowa prior to the Civil war is by no means demonstrated. The predominance of southerners among the men charged with the supervision of this region in the preterritorial days may have been a mere chance occurrance. The preference of the national government for men of southern blood or views in the territorial appointments was due, some may contend, to political conditions affecting the entire nation. Again the large number of southerners in our early legislative and constitutional assemblies, while very suggestive, is not in and of itself proof of the numerical preponderance of southern stock. And as to opinions they are usually based on promiscuous and vagrant impressions. The facts may be far different.

The New England tradition must be adversely considered, and presumptuous though it may seem, Justice Miller's judgment must be reversed; the decision must be Iowa was settled first by sons of the Old Dominion interspersed with the vigor of New England. Upon such a holding much that is inexplicable in Iowa's history becomes easily understandable. We can readily appreciate why Senator Dodge could so confidently proclaim in the senate in 1854 that he and his colleague, General Jones, with the senator from Pennsylvania were the only senators from the north who had voted against the Wilmot Proviso and for the fugitive slave law; and why Governor Grimes found the south half of Iowa so strongly pro-slavery.

This predominance of southern stock among Iowa's pioneers, the prevalence of southern traditions among the dominant political forces of the state prior to the Civil war had ineradicable effects upon the life and institutions of Iowans. Throughout the entire history of the state one may discern a sharp cleavage among the people of Iowa that in general typifies the traditional conflict between the Cavalier and the Puritan. It is manifest not only in the political life of the state, but in the social life of the people, in industry and commerce, in church and religion, in education and modes of recreation-sundry phases of which the writer hopes some time to set forth.

CHAPTER III

COUNTIES AND COUNTY NAMES-NUMBER IN THE STATE-LAWS AS TO THEIR CREATION ORIGIN OF DIVIDING STATES INTO COUNTIES AND TOWNSHIPS-HOW THEY WERE ORGANIZED IN IOWA.

COUNTY ORGANIZATION

With regard to the origin of dividing individual states into county and township organizations, which in an important measure should have the power and opportunity of transacting their own business and governing themselves under the approval of and subject to the state and general government of which they each formed a part, we quote from Elijah M. Haines, who is considered good authority on the subject.

In his "Laws of Illinois, Relative to Township Organizations," he says the county system "originated with Virginia, whose early settlers soon became large landed proprietors, aristocratic in feeling, living apart in almost baronial magnificence on their own estates, and owning the laboring part of the population. Thus the materials for a town were not at hand, the voters being thinly distributed over a great area.

"The county organization, where a few influential men managed the whole business of the community, retaining their places almost at their pleasure, scarcely responsible at all except in name, and permitted to conduct the county concerns as their ideas or wishes might direct, was, moreover, consonant with their recollections or traditions of the judicial and social dignities of the landed. aristocracy of England, in descent from whom the Virginia gentleman felt so much pride. In 1834 eight counties were organized in Virginia and the system. extending throughout the state spread into all the southern states and some of the northern states, unless we except the nearly similar division into 'districts' in South Carolina and that into 'parishes' in Louisiana, from the French laws. "Illinois, which with its vast additional territory, became a county of Virginia, on its conquest by General George Rogers Clark, retained the county organization, which was formally extended over the state by the constitution of 1818, and continued in exclusive use until the constitution of 1848.

"Under this system, as in other states adopting it, most local business was transacted by those commissioners in each county, who constituted a county court, with quarterly sessions.

"During the period ending with the constitution of 1847, a large portion of the state had become filled with a population of New England birth or character, daily growing more and more compact and dissatisfied with the comparatively

arbitrary and inefficient county system. It was maintained by the people that the heavily populated districts would always control the election of the commissioners to the disadvantage of the more thinly populated sections-in short that under that system 'equal and exact justice' to all parts of the county could not be secured.

"The township system had its origin in Massachusetts and dates back to 1635.

"The first legal enactment concerning this system provided that, whereas particular towns have many things which concern only themselves, and the ordering of their own affairs and disposing of business in their own town,' therefore, 'the freemen of every town, or the majority of them, shall only have power to dispose of their own lands and woods with all the appurtenances of said town, to grant lots, and to make such orders as may concern the well ordering of their own towns, not repugnant to the laws and orders established by the general court.'

"They might also," says Mr. Haines, "impose fines of not more than twenty shillings, and choose their own particular officers, as constables, surveyors for the highways and the like.'

"Evidently this enactment relieved the general court of a mass of municipal details, without any danger to the power of that body in controlling general measures of public policy.

"Probably also a demand from the freemen of the towns was felt for the control of their own home concerns.

"The New England colonies were first governed by a 'general court,' or legislature, composed of a governor and a small council, which court consisted of the most influential inhabitants and possessed and exercised both legislative and judicial powers, which were limited only by the wisdom of the holders.

"They made laws, ordered their execution by officers, tried and decided civil and criminal causes, enacted all manner of municipal regulations and in fact did all the public business of the colony.

"Similar provisions for the incorporation of towns were made in the first constitution of Connecticut, adopted in 1639, and the plan of township organization as experience proved its remarkable economy, efficiency and adaptation to the requirements of a free and intelligent people, became universal throughout New England and went westward with the emigrants from New England into New York, Ohio, and other western states."

Thus we find that the valuable system of county, township and town organizations had been thoroughly tried and proven long before there was need of adopting it in Iowa, or any of the broad region west of the Mississippi river. But as the new country began to be opened and as eastern people continued to move westward across the mighty river and form thick settlements along its western shore, the territory and state and county and township and town organizations soon followed in quick succession and those different systems became more or less modified and improved, accordingly as deemed necessary by the experience and judgment and demands of the people until they have arrived at the present stage of advancement and efficiency.

In the settlement of the territory of Iowa the legislature began by organizing counties on the Mississippi. As each new county was formed it was made

to include under legal jurisdiction, all the country bordering west of it and required to grant to the accidental settlers election privileges and an equal share in the county government with those who properly lived in the geographical limit of the county. The counties first organized along the eastern border of this state were given for a short time jurisdiction over the lands and settlements adjoining each on the west, until these different localities became sufficiently settled to support organizations of their own, and finally, at the first session of the legislature, after the Indians sold out, the newly acquired territory, including all northwestern Iowa, was laid off into counties, provisions were made for their respective organizations when the proper time should arrive and these were severally named.

At the time of the organization there were but two townships in the countyMagnolia and Jefferson. The organization was completed by the election of Abraham Fletcher, of Fremont county, Charles Wolcott, of Mills county, and A. D. Jones, of Pottawattamie county, commissioners; and Michael McKenney, organizing sheriff.

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

Dissensions and enmities, however, began to creep in gradually as the settlement progressed and continued to increase in working discontent very much in proportion as the settlements became more independently situated and more exclusive in their devotion to self interest and advancement. The unwelcome spirit of dissension began to manifest itself to the public most clearly perhaps about the time of the proclamation of the organizing sheriff announcing the organization of the county, which would create numerous offices to be filled from the ranks of the first voters.

These offices during the first term of course, presented no great inducement for being very eagerly sought after, so far as the salary was concerned, but then they afforded positions of influence and preference, and they might in the near future prove very convenient stepping stones to more lucrative and influential positions. Beside, it was no mean thing to be elected to fill the first offices created in the new county. In this regard they afforded considerable inducement for being sought after by those who were at all inclined toward official distinction. and they called forth numerous aspirants.

At that time as well as now, doubtless, there was a good percentage of worthy, influential citizens who, so far as their own desires for official position were concerned were entirely disinterested in the political canvass. These persons

sought no such positions for themselves and would not accept one if offered. Public applause and criticisms were not at all coveted by them. Nevertheless they were as deeply interested in the welfare of the county as any other citizens and had a decided preference for those who should receive their votes. They desired to entrust the county government to efficient, trustworthy men, who were willing to assume the responsibility, and capable of conducting it in an