The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1892-09-30
ANTHoNY,s REPLY TO CAMPBELL
Topeka, Kan, Sept. q, 1892.

your citizens upon pending political
issues, there appeared, under startling
head lines, two column communication
from one 1. p Campbell charging me
with an assorted lot" of official crimes
and misdemeanors in connection with
the history of Harper county, during
my incumbency of the office of governor.
The intent of this burst of indignation
was too patent to require the headline
question: evil Anthony deny these
charges in his speech tonight" It was a
deliberate, concerted purpose to evade
and avoid discussion of the revolution
airy vagaries of the Peoples party, which
threatens the safety and integrity of Re-
publican government 1t was cunning
device too old and too bare to deceive or
entrap any one, and did not work.
But you not only opened your columns
to this characterless assault upon me, but
followed it in your editorial account of
my meeting, more than half column in
extent, declaring that Anthony could
not reply to the Harper county accusa-
tons, and he never chirped." Changes
are wrung upon this assertion in more
than half dozen forms in your report
to show that my time was given TO the
less important questions Of communism,
socialism and fat finance, with which
we are threatened, to the neglect of the
paramount question of Harper county
affairs of fourteen years ago.
The Importance you attach to the
communication of Mr.. Campbell impeis
me to respond with the information you
desire and gives me a right TO expect
that you will give it as prominent a
place as you did tie charges and your
demand for my attention to them.
The whole Of Mr.. Campbelrs trade
may be condensed into the following
statement of facts and charges OF crime.
First That the county of Harper was
originally organized in fraud and put
under bonded debt by crime.
Second. That during my administra-
ton as Governor of Kansas, the county
had become settled to an extent that
called for a political organization by a
revival of the original one, or by new
ore which should ignore the old.
Third. That a colony had moved
into the north part of the county and
laid out the town of Harper with the in
tent to organize the county with it as
the county seat; that later another set OF
townsite county seat spectators laid
out a competitive town which was
finally named Anthony; that the two
came together in an effort, using his
haJ b,rt
failed to agree on a division of spolls.
Fourth. That in the conflict | became
interested in the Anthony town COM
pany, and made it, by executive procia-
nation, the county seat; and all this for
base, personal political purposes.
Now, Mr.. Editor, | propose to show
from the official records, to which any
one can have access in the governors
Office, that you have been imposed upon
by a careless as well as a colossal liar.
1t is bit of history as curious as a
novel, and will be read with interest
without regard to questions raised IN
your criticisms OF me.
In March 1878 petition gotten up
by the promoters of the town of Harper,
headed by j. B. Glen, was sent to me,
as governor, declaring that the county
had the required number of citizens to
organize a county government under
the then existing statutes, and asking
the appointment of T. Blake to take the
required census.
This was followed early in April 1878,
by the visit Of large dele
CATION from the county, III
conference with whom | outlined
the embarrassments which environed
the question of organization, and made
it impossible to proceed in the organiza-
ton Of the county as an original action.
They were told about the then existing
defacto organization and the result OF
any action which would serve to solidify
it. They stated that population was
rapidly increasing, and that there exist
ed an urgent necessity for county gov
eminent; retiring with apledge from me
to promptly investigate and report to
them the legal status Of the county, to-
gether with my opinion as to what was
best to be done.
After consulting the records and the
law, and submitting the facts to the at
torney general. |. wrote the committee
on April 10, 1878, in words following:
Il find your county to have been or
ganized under proclamation of the gov
ernor, Aug. 20, 1878; that subsequent in
veStlgation by a committee of the legis-
AZURE developed the fact that all the pa
pers upon which the proclamation was
based and subsequent organization arose
were fraudulent and forged, and that
under that fraudulent organization, court
mouse bonds to the amount of SO, 900,
and funding bonds to the amount OF
S15, 900 had been issued, and one MEM
Der of the committee asserts in this re-
port that he saw in the city CT New
York s.. 900 OF pretended school bonds,
and was satisfied that vast amount
Of school bonds of like nature was out
standing elsewhere. Upon this report
the legislature passed an act disorganiz-
lug the county, which act was vetoed by
Governor Osborn, thereby leaving the
county in its exact condition under the
fraudulent organization.
''In 1874 the legislature for the first
time gave "a formal recognition of the
county by the passage of a (section IS,
chapter a., session laws of "a authoriz-
ing the county TO issue bonds. This act
under the plain Interpretation of the de-
cision of the supreme court OF this state,
amends and cures all the irregularity
and fraud in the original organization
and establishes the county as a legal
municipality.
"Yet in the face of this subsequent
legislature by chapter 66, laws of 1915
attached your county TO Sumner county
for judicial purposes, thereby remanding
it to township of that county.
This latter act has been declared TN
constitutional by the district court on
the technical grounds of defective title
OF course that decision is not conclusIve