BIG BEND p. 539: DOUGLAS CO. 1871-1886 pt. 4

________________________

ch. 1, pt. 3, pp. 534-539        TABLE OF CONTENTS        ch. 2, pt. 1, pp. 545-551

________________________

539 (continued)

      The first attempt to remove the capital of Douglas county from Okanogan was made in the spring of 1886. This plan was originated by Commissioner Miles. His scheme was to move to the lake near where the town of Douglas now stands, by action of the board of county commissioners without consulting the wishes of the people. This proposition was immediately voted down by the other commissioners who, evidently, were aware that the removal would not be in accordance with law no matter how badly they were in need of water. The story is briefly told in the report of the commissioners' proceedings for May 3, 1886:

      On motion of R. Miles, that the county seat be moved to the lake, two and one-half miles west and south to the lake, motion not carried. R. Miles, yes (1), and F. H. Bosworth and Charles A. Wilcox, no (2).

      An interesting incident in the history of Douglas county was furnished in 1886. This was trouble between sheep men and settlers in the vicinity of Badger Mountain. In the spring of that year George Popple and Jack Walters, sheep men from the Crab Creek range, drove into the Badger Mountain country a band of 4,000 or 5,000 sheep.  Prior to this no sheep had been in the vicinity and the settlers, who invariably had a small band of cattle or horses, did not take kindly to the invasion, and were not at all modest in making their hostility known. This was first displayed by the occasional killing of sheep by shooting, with the evident desire of discouraging the continuance of the Badger Mountain countijy as a sheep range.

      This did not have the desired effect and finally an indignation meeting was held by the settlers at Nash's store, in "Nashland." A committee was appointed to wait on the sheepmen, requesting the removal of their flocks to other pastures. This was done and the sheep owners drove their flocks from the country. Simultaneous with their departure there appeared at different points on the mountain and along the foothills fires which threatened to destroy all the timber on the mountain. This would have been a fatal disaster to the interests of the country, and the fires also endangered much other property. The disappearance of the sheep men and the starting of these fires is invariably told in one story by the residents of the county who participated in this exciting event. All the settlers turned out and only after hard work were the fires overcome, the damage that was done amounting to many thousands of dollars. Never since that
period has western Douglas county been utilized as a sheep range. Official notice was taken of the starting of these disastrous fires by the passage of the following resolution by the board of county commissioners on May 6, 1886:

      Whereas, certain lawless persons, or person, have willfully and maliciously set out fire on and in the vicinity of Badger Mountain, Douglas county, with intent to injure and destroy the property of many of the citizens of said coimty, and by reason of the setting out of said fires not only thousands of dollars' worth

________________________

540

of personal property belonging to divers individuals was burned and more or less injured, also destroying large quantities of tbe standing timber on said mountain, being the principal in said county upon which the citizens rely for firewood and fencing, therefore be it resolved that the board of commissioners of said Douglas county do hereby offer a reward of three hundred dollars ($300) to any person or persons who will secure the apprehension and conviction of the person or persons setting out the aforesaid fire, to be paid out of the county treasury from any funds not otherwise appropriated."

     The offer of this reward did not result in throwing any light on the matter. The incident is shrouded in the same mystery that prevailed in 1886.

     It was not until 1886 that the Foster Creek section of the Big Bend received settlement. Mr. and Mrs. Downey were the first couple to locate on South Foster Creek. This was in October, 188$. In October, 1887, W. H. Knemeyer and wife located on the place now owned by them. On East Foster Creek Mrs. Patrick Haynes was the first woman. Those were lonely, trying days to the new, struggling settlers. All supplies were brought from Ellensburg. At that period there was no thought that Foster Creek could possibly become the prosperous, thickly settled section that it is today.

     There may be a few counties in Washington that have not passed through a county seat war. But they are not many. Douglas county's came in 1886, and at the time created considerable bitterness between the settlers on the east side of Grand Coulee and those on the west. This was caused by what the east Douglas county settlers termed the high-handed methods of the county commissioners in throwing out most of the east side votes. All bitterness has now, however, disappeared, and both factions can discuss the matter in an impartial and unbiased manner. Whether the commissioners exceeded their authority in taking the action they did we shall not attempt to say, simply confining ourselves to the facts as they they occurred. The reader must judge for himself.

     The fact that no water could be found in the vicinity of Okanogan made it highly probable that the county seat would not long remain in that place. And far-sighted people were not long in laying plans for the impending removal. Through the influence of parties in the Badger Mountain country the legislature of 1885-6 passed the following special law:

     "An act to provide for the location of the county seat of Douglas County, Washington Territory, by the vote of the qualified voters of said county.
     "Be it enacted by the Legislative Assembly of the Territory of Washington:
     "Sec. I. That the qualified electors of the county of Douglas are hereby aiithorized to vote at the next general election for delegate to Congress in the Territory in the year 1886, for the location of the county seat of said county, and the ofiicers of election shall receive said vote and make return thereof to the county commissioners who shall canvass the same and announce the result in like manner as the result of the vote for county officials.
     "Sec. 2. That the place receiving a majority of all the votes cast at said election in favor of the location of the county seat is hereby declared to be the county seat of Douglas county.
     "Sec. 3. All acts and parts of acts in conflict of this act are hereby repealed.
     "Sec. 4. This act shall take effect from and after its passage and approval by the governor.
     "Approved January 16, 1886."

     It was during this year that A. T. Greene and J. M. Snow planned the building of the town of Waterville, so called because there was water in the wells where it was proposed

________________________

541

to build the new town. Of course the removal of the county seat to the new town entered into their calculation and plans were laid to secure it. Following the platting of the town of Waterville by Judge Snow, in 1886, the sponsers for the new town announced that they were going to remove the county seat. This statement was made at the Democratic convention at Okanogan. All the friends of the new town were on hand and a feature of the convention was a barrel of water hauled from Waterville to Okanogan, showing conclusively that the boasted water of the new town was no myth. The board of trustees of Waterville,
Judson Murray, John Bronwfield, and J. H. Kincaid, announced that should Waterville be selected as the capital of the county, they would see that the county should have a free building for two years. This was a bombshell in the Okanogan camp, and the point was made in the convention that this offer was a proposition to bribe the people and in violation of Territorial law.

     This point is invariably raised in all county seat contests, but the contention is, of course, never sustained. Besides Waterville there were interested in the race Douglas City, the crossing of Grand Coulee, where the town of Coulee City now stands, and Okanogan. On election day there was a large vote and great interest
was taken in the contest. The vote on the location of the county seat, at the regular election of November, 1886, was not canvassed by the old board of county commissioners, or at least the result of the canvass was not officially made, they, doubtless, desiring to shift the responsibility onto the shoulders of the incoming board. The new board made this their first official act after their organization on May 2, 1887, a petition having been presented asking that the canvass be made. Following is the official record of the findings of the board in this exciting and sensational incident in the history of Douglas county:

     "Upon the presentation of a petition asking that the vote cast for county seat at the general election held in Douglas county on the 2d day of November, 1886, be canvassed and the result announced by the board of commissioners in accordance with section 1, pages 454 and 455, session laws of 1885-6, it was ordered that the record of commissioners' proceedings be examined to determine whether the former board of commissioners had or had not canvassed said vote as provided by law. Nothing appearing upon such record showing that the said vote had been canvassed, it was therefore ordered that the canvass be made forthwith. After an examination of all the election returns and the papers relating thereto, it was announced by the board that the vote for county seat of Douglas county at the above mentioned election was, and is as follows : "Waterville, 112 votes; Douglas City, 56; Okanogan, 7; Oneida, 1; section 3, township 24, range 28, east, 5."

     The "section 3, town 24, range 28 east," accredited with five votes, in the commissioners" canvass, was the Grand Coulee crossing location. In addition to this vote counted by the canvassers there were 75 votes cast for "Grand Coulee" and a few for "Grand Coulee Crossing," which were thrown out. This action of throwing out this vote was defended by the commissioners on the ground that the location of a county seat according to law must be at a place with definite boundaries. Waterville, Okanogan and Douglas City were
platted towns and their vote was counted. Section 3, town 24, range 28, east was held by them to be a definite location and the few votes for this place were counted. But the 75 votes cast for Grand Coulee was a different proposition. Grand Coulee, as popularly interpreted, was a huge gash in the earth some 50 miles long and of indefinite width. A county seat located at "Grand Coulee" might be anywhere in that territory. The vote for "Grand Coulee Crossing" was thrown out on similar grounds. The commissioners main-

________________________

542

tained that there were a number of Indian trails across Grand Coulee and that they could not determine which one of these was meant.

     The total vote for the Grand Coulee location, if all had been counted, would not have been a majority, which was necessary to remove from Okanogan. But had these been counted neither would Waterville have had a majority and the county seat would have remained at Okanogan, a consummation not devoutly wished. By throwing out all the "indefinite and uncertain" location votes Waterville had a majority.

     After certifying to, and signing the result of the canvass, the board passed the following resolution May 2d, ordering the removal of the county records.

     "County Commissioners' Court, Douglas County, Washington Territory: It appearing from an official canvass of the vote for county seat, cast at the general election held in Douglas county, Washington Territory, on the 2d day of November, 1886, that Waterville has a majority of all votes cast for county seat; therefore, we, the county commissioners of Douglas county, in conformity with an act entitled 'An Act to provide for the location of the county seat of Douglas county, Washington Territory, by the vote of the qualified electors of said county." pages 454 and 455, session laws of 1885-6, do hereby declare that the county seat of said Douglas county is removed from Okanogan and established at Waterville, county and territory above written; and it is hereby ordered that all county officers required by law to have and keep an office at the county seat remove their said offices from Okanogan to Waterville forthwith — and furthermore, remove all papers, records and other matter belonging to said county offices to the same place above declared to be the county seat of Douglas county, Washington Territory.
     "Seal.  J. W. Stephens, P. J. Young, H. N. Wilcox."

     The following day. May 3d, the board met at Waterville. Their action in declaring Waterville the county seat was far from meeting the approval of many residents of the county.  Among those who did not approve of the action of the board was County Auditor R. S. Steiner, who, while he desired the county seat to be removed to Waterville, did not consider that a proper canvass of the votes had been made. He presented to the board at its first meeting at Waterville the following letter:

     "Okanogan, Washington Territory, May 3d, 1887 — To the Honorable Board of Commissioners of Douglas County, Washington Territory:  Gentlemen — I hereby decline to comply with your order of May 2, 1887, relative to the removal of the auditor's office and the records therein from Okanogan to Waterville, county and Territory above written.
"R. S. Steiner,
"Auditor Douglas county."

     This action of the auditor was met by the commissioners by the following resolution:

     "Board of County Commissioners, County of Douglas, Territory of Washington: Whereas, on the 2d day of May, 1887, by virtue of the canvass duly made according to law of the vote cast for the location of the county seat of said Douglas county, said county seat was declared removed to, and established at Waterville, in said county and Territory, and
     "Whereas, R. S. Steiner, the auditor of said Douglas county, did on the 3d day of May. 1887. decline to comply with the general order of removal issued by the board of county commissioners to county officers, and does now hold his office and keep the records thereof at Okanogan, contrary to law and the order of this board, to the great detriment of public busi- ness, and especially the business of tlie board of county commissioners, who are without records or files, therefore,
     "Be it ordered by the board of county commissioners in session assembled at Waterville, in said Douglas county, that H. N. Wilcox, a

________________________

543

member of this board, proceed forthwith to make apphcation to the Honorable Judge of the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, Washington Territory, for a writ of Mandate to compel said R. S. Steiner, auditor of said Douglas county to remove his office records and files forthwith to said established county seat of Douglas county at Waterville, or show cause why such removal should not be made.
     "Witness our hands and the seal of the board of county commissioners of Douglas county, Washington Territory, this 3d day of May, A. D., 1887.
"J. W. Stephens,
"H. N. Wilcox,
"P. J. Young.
"County Commissioners."

     The next meeting of the board was held on May 23d, Mr. Wilcox reported that in compliance with the order he had proceeded at once to Sprague, the point at which the court for the Fourth Judicial District held its terms, to find that the said court had adjourned and that the judge thereof had proceeded to Spokane Falls. He thereupon interviewed the prosecuting attorney of the Fourth Judicial District, who instructed him to return to Waterville and issue an order to the sheriff, by authority of the board, requiring said sheriff to remove the county records, files, etc., from Okanogan to Waterville. This order was issued to the sheriff and that official executed the same.

     During this sensational period the rival factions kept a close watch on one another. It was deemed best by the Waterville parties to keep the mission of County Commissioner Wilcox, a secret, and he left ostensibly, to visit his timber claim, which was in another direction from the road to Sprague.  Mr. Wilcox, after making a trip out in the direction of his claim, changed his course and headed for Sprague. He was well on his journey when he met one of the Okanogan sympathisers, who was returning from a trip to Spokane Falls. Greetings were exchanged and each proceeded on his journey.  The Okanogan man had his suspicions aroused and when he reached home he saw A. T. Greene and in an off hand way stated that he had met Mr. Wilcox and wondered where he was going. Mr. Wilcox was credited with intending to get married at an early day, and Mr. Greene, not desiring to in- form his questioner of the true mission upon which the commissioners were engaged, turned the attentions of his neighbor to good account, in suggesting a probable reason for his visit to Sprague. Mr. Greene thought a moment, and then imparted the doubtful information that Mr. Wilcox, being a county officer, it would be natural for him to obtain a marriage license from the clerk of the district court whose office was at Sprague, and that perhaps was his mission to the Lincoln county capital.
     "Why, of course; I might have thought of that before," exclaimed the Okanogan sympathiser, and he at once spread the news that H. N. Wilcox had gone to Sprague to secure a marriage license.

     Sheriff Robins, in accordance with his instructions, went to Okanogan, loaded the county's possessions on a wagon and brought them to Waterville. The outfit consisted of a stove, a home-made table, the commissioners' journal and a very few books and papers of record.

     This removal to Waterville was the cause of the passage of an act by the Territorial Legislative Assembly in 1888. The legality of the acts of the county commissioners and other county officers was brought into question because of the alleged irregularities in counting the vote for county seat location and the subsequent removal of the capital of Douglas county. The act of the law-making Ixidy of the Territory regarding this matter was as follows:

     "An Act legalizing the acts of the county officers of Douglas county, Washington Territory:
     "Be it enacted by the Legislative Assembly of the Territory of Washington:

________________________

544

     "Sec. I. That all acts of all county officers of Douglas county, Washington Territory, done either at Okanogan or Waterville, in said county, since the second day of November, A. D., 1886, so far as said acts affect, or are affected by the location of the county seat of said Douglas county, be, and the same are hereby declared and made legal.
     "Sec. 2. This act shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage and approval.
     "Approved January 31, 1888."

     This legislation was secured through the influence of Judge J. M. Snow, one of the most ardent supporters of Waterville in the contest, and who upheld the action of the commissioners in every particular. He repaired to Olympia as a lobbyist and laid the matter before the legislature in this light:

     "Our commissioners have put us in a box. They have moved the county seat from Okanogan to Waterville, possibly without proper authority. But at any rate, all kinds of trouble is brewing for us unless the acts of the county commissioners while in session at Waterville are legalized."

     The act was passed and, undoubtedly, saved the county much litigation and expense.

     When the county records were brought down to Waterville from Okanogan the county officials were confronted with the problem of securing a court house. Buildings in Waterville at that period were not so plentiful as they might have been, and had a newspaper been published in the shire town of Douglas county it could have said with hearty truthfulness, "There is not a vacant building in the town."  But preparations had been made for just such an emergency. Isaac Newhouse had been induced by J. M. Snow to erect a building which the latter had agreed to rent, ostensibly for a real estate office, but in reality to use as a court house should the county seat be removed. This was the second building erected in the town. In this edifice the county business was transacted until the handsome new court house was presented to the county.

     This little building when the county took possession was roughly put up, without battens, and daylight could be seen between the boards in many places. A dry goods box was used as a desk for the auditor and the commissioners sat at a table made by placing boards on saw horses, and in place of chairs the commissioners sat on the ends of the "horses." Of course better accommodations were added later, but for some time the condition above described prevailed. This building was, also, the postoffice, and Judge Snow used the rear portion as an office. During this period of the county's history business was not rushing. No deputies were allowed, nor were they necessary. On one occasion, so we are reliably informed, all
the regular county officers went off on a vacation of several weeks. R. W. Starr, then a resident of the county, for only about six weeks, was deputized as auditor, clerk, treasurer and probate judge, and creditably performed the duties of all four offices until the return of the regular county officials. One can imagine the consternation that would be created by an act of this kind at the present day. But then conditions were vastly different. The tax payers of the county had their affairs managed in a manner satisfactory to them, and the slight irregularity of a resident of the county of only a few weeks' standing presiding over most of the county offices for a period of a few weeks, more or less, did not cause a ripple of protest.

________________________

ch. 1, pt. 3, pp. 534-539        TABLE OF CONTENTS        ch. 2, pt. 1, pp. 545-551

________________________