The Iola register. [volume] (Iola, Allen County, Kansas) 1875-1902, 1878-07-20
PUBLIC SQUARE.

SATURDAY, JULY 20, 1873.
PUBLIC SQUARE.
ED. REGIS TEE Probably no question
could be suggestedAs>pt would b o
greater interest 10 the citizens of lola q
the present time, than the condition O
the public square. 1t is, and has beer
for several years, matter of doubt q
TO who owned or had proper control of it
A great deal is being said-some sense
but mostly nonsense, because of lacl
of knowledge of the facts. In the hops
that solution may be arrived ct that
will be satisfactory to all concerned, per
init me to give a brief history of the
facts as taken from the records.
lola was laid out by corporation, or
ganized under the laws of the Territory
of Kansas, and known as the 'Iola Town
Company" When the town of lola was
changed to an incorporated city, the lola
Town Company continued its existence
unaffected by the change. On the first
day of January, 1871, the city of lola
issued fifty thousand dollars of the bonds
of the city to secure the location of the
King Bridge Co.'S shops. The bonds
were issued in good faith, and there was
then no expectation but that they would
be paid, bat how to meet SO large an OBJ
legation, without ruinous tax, puzzled
oar best 6nanciers. The suggestion that
the public square should be sold and the
proceeds applied to the payment of the
bonds, was seized upon as the best that
could be done, and proceedings were i'm
mediately begun to bring about that
result.
The first act was to vacate the square.
This act would return it to the party that
gave 1.-THE lola Town Co.-and grum-
blers commenced saying that when the
Town Co., got possession, they would
keep it. Why such suspicion should
have existed in regard to an organiza.
tion which had given all it ever owned
for public improvements, we need not
stop now to inquire. but such fear did
exist. In order to restore confidence,
and get the matter in working order,
meeting of the lola Town Company was
called Nov. 29th, 1871, to consider the
matter. After several meetings of the
company and various conferences with
the city council, the county commits
sioners, and some of the best lawyers in
the State as to the proper and legal steps
to be taken, an agreement was reached
on the 4th day of May, 1872, which was
substantially as afterward appeared in
the deed to trustees.
On the 9th Jan. 1872, the Secretary
Of the company was instructed to send
= statement and request to our repre-.
in the legislature asking them
to secure the passage of bill vacating
the square. A bill was accordingly in
tr oduced to that effect, but did not pass,
for the reason that the legislature had
already delegated to the county com.
missioners all the power necessary, so
that no act OF the legislature was need.
ed. Jan. 9th, 1872, petition signed by
all except one of the parties owning lots
ON the square, was presented to
the city council askins that the interest
Of the city in the square be surrendered to
trustees for the purpose of the payment
IF the bonds, which petition was granted,
and the Mayor ordered to make the
necessary deed. On the 9th day of the
same month. the same petition was pre-.
vented to the county commissioners, who
after due consideration, declared the
public 81 uare vacated, and ordered the
chairman TO make quit-claim deed,
1872.
The Mayor of lola made trust deed
On the same day. May 18th, James
Faulkner, President of the lola Town
Company, in accordance with previous
Instructions made trust deed to Geo.
A. BOwlus, John Francis and Daniel
HOrville.
The provisions of the trust was that
they should cause the square to be laid
,ut in lots for business purposes; to sell
hem for cash, or on ten years time, and
with the money when collected, buy up
and cancel the bonds. Section 4 pro-
9ides shat after said bonds and the in |
terest thereon Ssaall have beeh paid, all
aOneys, lots and securities remaining un.
aud not disposed of, shall |
,e held by said trustees subject to the
rider of the said lola Town Company.
Section 6 provides for the filling of |
'acaacies by appointment by the presi-
lent of the Town Company.
All the deeds were IN substance the |
anne except the 4th and 9th sections
quoted. No hing was left uudone that
'Ould strengthen the title in these three
rustees.
Before any sales were made, the Bridge
company moved to Topeka, and it was
hen decided not to pay the bonds at
u, and the suit which followed was de-
ided in our favor. Whatever title these
rustees ever had, they still have, as
hey have not returned it to the gran
ors, and they have not executed the
rHst, nor has their title ever been set
side by order of any court. They have
hen complete present control
The city of lola has, at present, no
more control over it than over any other
'rivate property. Those trust deeds
ermit either one of two things to be
one-to execute the trust, or return it.
The full extent to which the trust
ould now be executed, would be the
ale of lots to reimburse the city of lola
Dr. expenses in defending the law suit.
'ossibly even that would be too far.
hat Is . question for lawyers. There
An be little doubt of the right of the
rustees to make deed back to the lola
own Company. 1t could then be dedi-
ated again to the public for 4 public