Fountain County IN Archives History - Books .....Public Buildings 1881
************************************************
Copyright.  All rights reserved.
http://www.usgwarchives.net/copyright.htm
http://www.usgwarchives.net/in/infiles.htm
************************************************

File contributed for use in USGenWeb Archives by:
Joy Fisher sdgenweb@yahoo.com August 23, 2006, 11:09 pm

Book Title: History Of Fountain County

PUBLIC BUILDINGS.

   The first court-house and jail have already been mentioned.

   The purchase of brick for the second court-house was ordered by the board of
justices in March 1829. In November, 1830, the commissioners adopted the plan
and specifications for "a new court-house," to be constructed of brick, with a
stone foundation: the house to be erected "on the center of the public square";
and the county agent was authorized to receive "proposals unto the first Monday
in January next." Notice was to be given in the "Western Register" and "Free
Press."

   In 1831 an act of the legislature was passed providing for the relocation of
the county seat, upon certain conditions, among which was the payment of the
damages caused by the relocation, and Thomas Brown, Peter Hughes and Peter Rush
were appointed to "value the town lots in the town of Covington, and to make an
estimate of how much less value said property will be by the removal of the seat
of justice therefrom." Their estimate of damages was $9,721, and it was returned
to the board in May 1831.

   By this act of the legislature commissioners were appointed with power to
examine the situation of the county and report upon the same. They made the
following report, which settled the county-seat question for that time:

   To the Honourable the County Commissioners of Fountain County:

   The undersigned, Reuben Reagan, Joseph Potts, George W. Benefield and Zabina
Babcock, a majority of the commissioners appointed by an act of the General
Assembly of the State of Indiana, entitled "An act to provide for the relocation
of the seat of justice of Fountain county," approved January 29, 1831, ask leave
to report that they did, on the first Monday of June, A.D. 1831, convene at the
town of Covington, and after first taking the several oaths required by law,
proceeded to examine the situation of the county, until Wednesday the 8th day of
said month. They unanimously agreed that the town of Covington be and remain the
permanent seat of justice of said county, and that the plat of said town
heretofore recorded be and remain the plat of said county seat, and that the
said place in all respects remain as it was previous to the passage of the act
above mentioned.

   In testimony whereof we have hereunto set our hands and seals this 8th day of
June, A. D. 1831.

                                  REUBEN REAGAN,        [SEAL]
                                  JOSEPH POTTS,         [SEAL]
                                  GEORGE W. BENEFIELD,  [SEAL]
                                  ZABINA BABCOCK.       [SEAL]

   The building of the new court-house was retarded by the contest under this
act about the location of the county seat, and the house was not completed until
1833. Who the builder was, or what was the contract price, is not disclosed by
the minutes of the board of commissioners.

   In March, 1842, the order was made for the erection of a building for the use
of the clerk, recorder and auditor, on the public square, east of the
court-house, to front east, 38 feet long and 25 feet wide. This building was
erected, and will be remembered by many of the older citizens of the county. It
was occupied for a great many years by the county officers. What it cost is not
now known.

   In May, 1856, the commissioners contracted with James G. Hardy and Albert
Henderson for the delivery of 300,000 brick, at $5.85 per thousand, to be used
in the building of new court-house; and in June, 1856, they employed Isaac
Hodgson as the architect.

   In September, 1856, a further contract was made with Messrs. Hardy and
Henderson to furnish all the brick necessary to be used in the construction of
the building, at the same price, and the contract was let to Lewis Toms, for the
erection of the house, at $28,785.50; .and he was to accept and pay for the
brick to be furnished under the Hardy and Henderson contract. The architect was
to have four and a half per cent upon the cost of the building for his services
in superintending its construction.

   In March, 1857, Mr. Toms notified the board that he could not fulfill his
contract, and he was released therefrom upon the payment of $150.

   The contract was then let to Mr. James G. Hardy for $33,500. Several changes
were made in the plan of the building while it was in the process of
construction, and it was finally completed in the fall of 1859 at a cost of
about $36,500. In January, 1860, on the first day of the sitting of the circuit
court, the house took fire and was partially destroyed, nothing being left
except parts of the walls and the foundation. Measures were at once taken to
rebuild, and a contract was made with John H. Thomas to do the work and furnish
the materials for $14,800; this was increased, by changes and extra work, to
$18,124.05.

   Joseph H. Nelson was the superintendent, and Mr. Hodgson the architect. The
house thus built is the one now occupied. Its total cost, including cost of
first structure, was $54,624.05. It was finished and first occupied in January
1861.

   The county has built four prisons and three sheriff's residences. The first
has been mentioned.

   In January, 1837, the commissioners decided to build the second, and adopted
plans and ordered notice of a letting on the second Monday in February
following, to be published in the "Western Constellation."

   The contract was let to Wm. Titus for $1,700. The jail was completed for that
sum, and was accepted in January 1838.

   In June, 1842, a contract was made with William S. Patterson to build a
sheriff's residence in front of and adjoining the jail, 18x20 feet in dimensions
on the ground, and two stories high. This building was completed at an expense
of $397.50.

   In December, 1850, it was decided that a new jail was needed, and an order
was made to build one of dressed stone, one story high, 25 1/2 x 27 feet on the
ground, with three cells 6x10 feet, and a hall in front of the cells 8 X 24
feet. There was also a dwelling-house, to be attached to the jail, provided for,
and this was to be 20 X 25 1/2 feet on the ground, one story in height, and to
contain three rooms. The contract for building this jail was let in March, 1851,
to Joseph L. Sloan; and it was provided that he should not begin work until
after the first Monday in the following April, when the vote upon relocation was
to be taken. This vote resulted in favor of Covington, and Mr. Sloan completed
his contract at a cost to the county of about $3,129. The exact sum cannot be
given, but this is within a very few dollars of it.

   In April, 1873, the commissioners met in special session and adopted
specifications for a new prison and sheriff's residence, and in May, 1873, the
contract for building the same was awarded to John McManomy at $49,399.95. At
the same session the board required the architect to change the plans so as to
reduce the cost to $37,500. To meet the expense of this building, an issue of
$100,000 of ten per cent ten-years bonds was authorized. These bonds found a
ready market, and were sold before any attempt to prevent their issue was made.
An effort was afterward made to have the action of the board, authorizing their
issue, set aside and held illegal, but it failed, because, among other reasons,
the bonds had been sold and the county had gotten the money, and it was
therefore too late to complain of irregularities in their issue.

   In September, 1873, in a suit brought to annul the contract for building the
jail, the circuit court held it illegal, and enjoined the further prosecution of
any work or the payment of money under it. At this time the work had progressed
far toward completion, and the county had paid the contractor about $38,000. Of
course the question at once arose as to the rights of the parties, and as to the
manner in which the county could secure itself for the large sum of money which
she had paid the contractor, and which he claimed was all invested in the work
done and the materials on hand. The foundation and the superstructure, so far as
completed, was on lots owned by the county, and the materials in the building
could not be taken out of it without lessening their value. The contracting
parties could not proceed any further under the contract, and in this dilemma
they adopted the plan of accepting the materials furnished and work done as
things voluntarily furnished the county, and under a statute which gave the
commissioners the discretionary power to pay for things thus furnished, and
prohibited an appeal from their decision, the board made an allowance, based
upon the architect's estimate of $41,900, in payment of the work and materials,
deducting therefrom the sums previously paid under the contract. This done, the
county had an unfinished jail on its hands, with nearly all the materials on the
ground to finish it. The original contract had been held to be void, on the
ground that the proper notice of the letting had not been given, as required by
a statute which made it unlawful to make a contract for the construction of a
public building until after six weeks' notice had been given. As this statute
said nothing about contracts to complete a building already begun, the board
concluded it had authority, without notice, to make a contract for the
completion of the building, and accordingly made a contract with the same party
to complete the jail and sheriff's residence, agreeing to pay him for the work
and material necessary for this purpose at the same rate as that which was
observed in making him [the allowance for materials, etc., voluntarily furnished.

   The building was completed under this last arrangement at a cost, including
the sum paid under the contract, of $106,889.08. That this great sum was largely
in excess of what the county ought to have expended in such a building will
scarcely admit of dispute: but upon whom the responsibility ought to rest is a
question not so easily answered, and one which it is not the province of this
history to answer. Any attempt to fix the responsibility would revive questions
and disputes that are better left buried in the past which covers them, and it
would serve no useful purpose now.

   It would probably be found that the responsibility took a wider range, and
included more people, than the face of the proceedings indicates, and it
certainly would result in nothing better than a bitter controversy. The more
sensible course is to profit by what has been done in avoiding similar
consequences in the future.

ASYLUM FOR THE POOR.

   How to provide for its poor is always a question of perplexing difficulty for
any state or community to answer. This question has occupied the attention of
the greatest and best men and women in all ages from the very earliest period.
Alms-giving was, at an early period of the world's history, inculcated as a
religious observance.

   Among the Greeks it was provided that those who were maimed in battle should
be supported at public expense, and in the legislation of all modern countries
laws for the relief of the poor have a conspicuous place.

   The duty of providing for the helpless poor has never been disputed, but the
difficulty has been to distinguish between the poor who would maintain
themselves if they could and the poor who could maintain themselves if they
would, and to found public charities so that they will be efficient in relieving
the deserving poor, and yet not destructive of the independence, industry,
integrity and domestic virtue which is as necessary to one condition of life as
another. The most sensible idea seems to be that which makes relief, in all
cases where there is ability to work, temporary, and to cease as soon as the
recipient of the charity can be put in a position to support himself; effort
being made in the meantime to find employment for all who are able to work.
There is but little doubt that the ordinary county asylum is as often the home
of the voluntary mendicant as of him whose necessities and misfortunes compel
him to seek its shelter. The idle and vicious as frequently find a retreat there
as the unfortunate.

   It is therefore no place for the children who have become wards of the state
through poverty to be brought up in. These ought to be provided with the
education and training to fit them for lives of usefulness, and not left to grow
up in an atmosphere of idleness and pauperism to become themselves idlers and
paupers, and the progenitors of idlers and paupers. Pity and charity are the
noblest of emotions, and misfortune always appeals to both, and its appeal ought
never to be in vain; but that is the truest help which puts the unfortunate in
the way of helping himself, and it is the help which will be most grateful to
the deserving poor, for while it relieves their necessities it preserves their
independence. There is but very little to be said of the public buildings
erected for the relief of the poor in this county.

   The first house was completed in March, 1837, and there is nothing of record
to indicate its size or cost; but it is known that it was a very plain and
inexpensive building, which stood northeast from Covington about two miles away.

   In 1862 or 1863 the county became the purchaser of the present farm occupied
by it, lying three miles north of Covington; and in 1863 the contract for
building the asylum now standing thereon was let to Nathaniel Morgan, of
Crawfordsville, for $8,700. The house is well and substantially built, and will
be sufficient to meet the wants of the county for a long time to come.

   The only other building the county ever owned which needs be mentioned was
the county seminary, built under the law of 1843 providing for the erection of a
county seminary in each county of the state. This law took effect in 1843, and
in June, 1844, the board of commissioners appointed John Hamilton, Benedict
Morris and William Hoffman a committee "to superintend the building of a county
seminary," with power to adopt a plan for the same. The committee adopted a
plan, and the contract was let to Wm. S. Patterson and John Billsland, their bid
being $1,064.08. The county seminary plan was a failure, and this building was,
until it burnt down, used for the common schools of Covington.


Additional Comments:
Extracted from:

HISTORY OF FOUNTAIN COUNTY,

TOGETHER WITH
HISTORIC NOTES ON THE WABASH VALLEY,

GLEANED FROM EARLY AUTHORS, OLD MAPS AND MANUSCRIPTS
PRIVATE AND OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE, AND OTHER AUTHENTIC, THOUGH, FOR THE MOST
PART, OUT-OF-THE-WAY SOURCES.

BY H. W. BECKWITH,
OF THE DANVILLE BAR; CORRESPONDING MEMBER OF THE HISTORICAL SOCIETIES OF
WISCONSIN AND CHICAGO.

WITH MAP AND ILLUSTRATIONS.

CHICAGO: H. H. HILL AND N. IDDINGS, PUBLISHERS.
1881.


File at: http://files.usgwarchives.net/in/fountain/history/1881/historyo/publicbu59nms.txt

This file has been created by a form at http://www.genrecords.net/infiles/

File size: 15.3 Kb