Centennial History of Columbus and Franklin County. William Alexander Taylor

Centennial History of Columbus and Franklin County - William Alexander Taylor


Скачать книгу
appraiser, to list and value property for borough taxation. The recorder made out the tax duplicate, and the marshal was the collector. The first election for councilman was held at the Columbus Inn on the 6th of May, 1816.

      The elections; were by general ticket, and all the town voted at the same poll. The first members were to serve one, two and three years, so that three new members were elected each year after. The first councilmen elect met at the same inn on the 13th of the same month and organized.

      In March, 1817, the old market house, that had been erected by contributions, was declared a nuisance and an ordinance passed for its removal.

       Members of Council.

      During the eighteen years of the borough organization, from 1816 to 1834. the following gentlemen served at various periods, as members of the council, to-wit: Messrs. Robert W. McCoy, Jeremiah Armstrong, Robert Armstrong, Henry Brown, John Cutler, Caleb Houston, John Kerr, Michael Patton, Jarvis Pike, James B. Gardiner, Christian Heyl, William McElvain, James Kooken, Townsend Nichols, Ralph Osborn, P. H. Olmsted, John Jeffords, Eli C. King, L. Goodale, Charles Lofland, W. T. Martin, John Greenwood, John Laughry, James Robinson, John W. Smith. William Long, Joel Buttles, Nathaniel McLean, Joseph Ridgway, George Jeffries, John Warner, Robert Brotherton, Jonathan Neereamer, Robert Riordan, Samuel Parsons, John Patterson, Moses R. Spurgion.

      The following were the officers appointed by the town council: Mayor—Jarvis Pike, 1816; Jarvis Pike, 1817; John Kerr, 1818: John Kerr. 1819; Eli C. King, 1820; Eli C. King, 1821; Eli C. King, 1822; John Laughry, 1823; William T. Martin, 1824; William T. Martin, 1825: William T. Martin, 1826; James Robinson, 1827; William Long, 1828; William Long, 1829; William Long, 1830; William Long, 1831; William Long, 1832; P. H. Olmsted, 1833.

      Recorder—R. W. McCoy, 1816; R. W. McCoy, 1817; Jas. B. Gardiner; 1818: Ralph Osborn, 1819; John Kerr, 1820; John Kerr, 1821; John Kerr, 1822; William T. Martin, 1823; William Long, 1824; William Long, 1825; William Long, 1826; William Long, 1827; L. Goodale. 1828: L. Goodale. 1829; L. Goodale, 1830; N. McLean, 1831; R, Osborn, 1832; John Patterson, 1833.

      Marshal—Samuel King, 1816; Samuel King, 1817; James Fisher, 1818; William Richardson, 1819; Samuel Shannon, 1820; Samuel Shannon. 1821; Samuel Shannon, 1822; Samuel Shannon, 1823; Benjamin Sells, 1824; Samuel Shannon. 1825; Samuel Shannon, 1826; John Kelly, 1827; Benjamin Sells, 1828; Benjamin Sells, 1829; J. G. Godman, 1830; John Kelly, 1831; Benjamin Sells, 1832; George B. Harvey, 1833.

      Treasurer—Robert Armstrong, 1816; Robert Armstrong, 1817; Christian Heyl. 1818: Christian Heyl, 1819; Christian Heyl, 1820; Christian Heyl, 1821; Christian Heyl, 1822; Christian Heyl, 1823; Christian Heyl, 1824; Christian Heyl, 1825; Christian Heyl, 1826; Christian Heyl. 1827; R. W. McCoy, 1828; R. W. McCoy. 1829; R. W. McCoy, 1830; R. W. McCoy, 1831; R, W. McCoy, 1832; R. W. McCoy, 1833.

      Surveyor—John Kerr, 1816; John Kerr, 1817; John Kerr, 1818; John Kerr, 1819; Jeremiah McLene, 1820; John Kerr, 1821; John Kerr, 1822; Jeremiah McLene, 1823; Jeremiah McLene, 1824; Jeremiah McLene, 1825; Jeremiah McLene, 1826; Jeremiah McLene, 1827; Jeremiah McLene, 1828; Jeremiah McLene, 1829; Jeremiah McLene, 1830; Jos. Ridgway, Jr., 1831; Byron Kilbourne, 1832; Byron Kilbourne, 1833.

      Clerks of Market—William Long, 1816; William Long, 1817; William Richardson, 1818; William Richardson, 1819; Samuel Shannon, 1820; Samuel Shannon, 1821; Samuel Shannon, 1822; Samuel Shannon, 1823; Samuel Shannon, 1824; Samuel Shannon, 1825: Samuel Shannon, 1826; John Kelly, 1827; Benjamin Sells, 1828; Benjamin Sells. 1829; Julius G. Godman, 1830; John Kelly, 1831; Benjamin Sells, 1832; George B. Harvey, 1833.

      It will be observed that while there were one hundred and sixty-two councilmanic terms during the sixteen years of the borough organization, there were but thirty-seven different councilmen chosen or nearly five terms for each.

      There were eighteen mayorial terms and eight different mayors.

      There were eighteen recordership terms and ten different recorders.

      There were eighteen terms of marshalship and ten different marshals. There were eighteen terms of treasurership and three different persons were treasurer.

      There were eighteen terms of surveyorship and four different persons surveyor.

      There were eighteen terms of clerk of the market and six different persons clerk.

      That is to say that seventy-eight persons constituted the entire officialdom of the borough during the eighteen years of its existence, where as there were fifteen terms of office beginning and ending annually, after the first year, which if divided on the two term basis, would have given one hundred and thirty-five officials two terms each.

       Enter the City of Columbus.

      By an act of the legislature, passed March 3rd, 1834, Columbus was incorporated a city and divided into three wards. All north of State street constituted the first ward, all between State and Rich the second, and all south of Rich the third ward: each ward to be represented by four councilmen, to be elected on the second Monday of April in the same year. The term of service of the first board to be determined by lot, and afterward one member to be elected annually from each ward. The mayor to be elected biennially by the people.

      CHAPTER IV. COLUMBUS BECOMES A CITY.

      In some respects the legislative charter of March 3, 1834, was not unlike the borough charter of 1816; while in others it was widely variant. Both are worthy of intelligent study, even in this day of advanced ideas of municipal government. The borough charter contained the most advanced ideas of the smaller municipal governments of its day, and so, also, the city charter contained the best ideas then prevalent for the large municipalities or cities. One who reads closely, and studies intelligently, both these charters, and especially the last, will discern that they were legislative enactments, directly in the interests of the citizens and rate payers, and offered little or no encouragement to politicians and job hunters.

      They are a fair, and in one way, a uniform type of the village, borough and city governmental system of that age. Plain, straightforward, clear and comprehensive statements of the delegation of powers to the citizens from the higher sovereign, defining the limits within which they might exercise home rule. The widely different forms and qualities of local and municipal government which have been the vogue for the past quarter of a century, tends to give them great historical value, and make them a most important feature in the annals of the city and, therefore, worthy of historical perpetuation.

      If one will read the contemporaneous record of history in the light of these enabling acts, he will be struck with the almost total absence of official scandal and realize that the official faults which were open to censure were practically only venial ones. These charters contain no doubtful grants of power, confer no india rubber prerogatives to be stretched at the inclination of the official. It was held by the statesmen of that day that the opportunity to do wrong in official station was seldom, if ever, escaped by weak men and eagerly improved by dishonest ones. Hence, they barred all opportunity and the result fully justified their austerity. That even a weak man might be strong in the absence of temptation, while strong men were not always strengthened, by coming in contact with it. Plainness, directness, straightforwardness and strict accountability in government are not so constituted as to make office holding a gold-mine, whatever they may do in the conservation of private rights and the promotion of public virtue and civic progress.

      The Charter entire follows:

      Sec. 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Ohio, that so much of the county of Franklin as is comprised within the following limits, to-wit: Beginning at a point where the southwest corner of the new penitentiary lot bounds on the Scioto river thence north with the west line of said lot, to the north side of Public Lane, thence east with Public Lane to the east side of Fourth street to Broad street, thence east with the north side of Broad street to the east side of Seventh street, thence south with the east side of Seventh street to South Public Lane, thence west with the south side of Public Lane, to the alley which is the east boundary of South Columbus, thence south with the east side of said alley to the south side of the alley or lane, which is the


Скачать книгу