Frank Manny was born in Halle Saxe, Mersburg, Germany, on March 13, 1843. His family were beer brewers and he was brought up in that trade. Coming to America in 1862, he first lived at St. Louis, but emigrated to Kansas in 1870. He took up a claim in the south part of Rock township.

Many are the stories of the unselfish spirit of helpfulness to others that the early settlers tell. One of them may not be amiss. The incident occurred at the time of the horse stealing troubles, about Douglass and vicinity in 1870. Several "rustlers" were shot or hung by the enraged settlers, and all strangers were regarded with suspicion. Such were always detained until they could give an account of themselves. At this time, Alex Graham and his sister, now Mrs. Musgrove, and Mrs. W. G. Graham, returning from Emporia, were halted at Douglass and were in danger of being roughly handled, the excitement being great. Happening along came Frank Manny, who knew slightly Dr. and Mrs. Graham, and immediately identified and vouched for the party. The vigilantes then agreed to let the women proceed but deter-mined to hold Alex and his wagon a day or two. The horses were unharnessed, the women mounted thereon; and it being night, Frank Manny led them, walking all the way from Douglass to Dr. Graham’s place north of town, a good twenty miles. This he did as cheerfully and unthoughtedly as many another man would "pass a good day."

After ‘proving up’ on his claim, Manny came to Winfield for a year or two, then went to Wichita for a time. He married Mary Chamberlain there in 1876.

Frank Manny and his wife returned to Winfield, which remained his home for the rest of his life. They had six children: Carrie, May, Frank, Carl, Lee, and Ruth.

Frank Manny built a stone brewery and ice house, at a cost of $13,000, after January 1, 1878. The 1888 city directory shows his home at 804 East Third and his ice and coal yard on East Ninth street.

Winfield Courier, March 18, 1875.

District Court Docket.

The following is a list of cases that will stand for trial at the March term, A. D., 1875, of the District Court of Cowley County, to be holden on and from the 22nd day, and have been placed on the Trial Docket in the following order.

CIVIL DOCKET. FIFTH DAY.

No. 480. J. C. Musgrove, vs. Frank Manny.

Winfield Courier, March 25, 1875.

Disposition of cases in the District Court up to Wednesday night.

State of Kansas Versus—

480. J. C. Musgrove, vs. Frank Manny, judgment for plaintiff.

Winfield Courier, September 2, 1875.

J. D. Hanlin will sow one hundred and sixty, Frank Manny, seventy, and J. B. Holmes, over two hundred acres of wheat this fall. These are only a few of the large fields that will be sown in Rock Township.

Winfield Courier, September 16, 1875.

Cowley County District Court.

The following is a list of cases that will stand for trial at the September term of the District Court, to be holden on and from the 27th, and have been placed on the Trial Docket in the following order.

CIVIL DOCKET. SIXTH DAY.

Frank Akers vs. Frank Manny.

Arkansas City Traveler, March 15, 1876.

The following is a list of cases that will stand for trial at the April term A. D. 1876, of the District Court of Cowley, and have been placed on the Trial Docket in the following order.

CIVIL DOCKET. THIRD DAY.

Frank Akers vs. Frank Manny.

Winfield Courier, October 25, 1877.

WICHITA ITEMS.

MARRIED. Frank Manny, who formerly lived in Rock Township, lately married a Miss Mary Chamberlain, and is running a brewery at Wichita.

Winfield Courier, June 6, 1878.

On last Saturday, June 1st, about four o’clock p.m., Jay Page, saloon keeper of this place, was shot and killed by L. J. Webb, attorney, and member of the House of Representatives of the State. Crowds of men immediately assembled around the scene of the transaction and great excitement prevailed. At the time of the shooting Mr. Page was standing against the counter of his saloon in conversation with Frank Manny, when Mr. Webb entered from the back room; and walking up to within about twelve feet of Mr. Page, drew a revolver from his pocket and fired—the ball entering Page’s left breast about five inches above the nipple. Page ran out the front door, blood gushing from his mouth and nostrils, crying that Webb had killed him. He ran along the sidewalk perhaps 100 feet and fell. He was taken up, bleeding from the mouth profusely. He expired immediately. No word was spoken in the saloon by either Webb or Page. After firing the shot Webb turned to the counter, where he handed his pistol to J. L. M. Hill, deputy sheriff, and went out in custody of Hill.

Coroner W. G. Graham caused to be summoned before him by J. H. Finch, deputy sheriff, a coroner’s jury, composed of W. Q. Mansfield, B. F. Baldwin, A. A. Jackson, H. Brotherton, A. E. Baird, and W. Gillelen. Frank Manny, Newton Ball, and Jesse Herndon, eye-witnesses to the transaction, were sworn and testified to the facts as above stated.

The jury returned a verdict to the effect that Jay Page came to his death by a shot from a pistol fired in the hands of L. J. Webb.

Jay Page came to this city from El Dorado in January last. He had formerly been in Topeka and cities further east. He was a young man of about thirty years of age, well formed, active, wiry, of good address and prepossessing appearance. He was a professional gambler, and is represented as having been not only skillful as a gambler but unprincipled, daring, and reckless, one of the kind who are quick and handy with the pistol and have plenty of nerve to use it.

When Page came to this place, he set himself to building a large stone two-story building with brick open front. The building was completed about six weeks ago, and is one of the large, substantial, and showy business houses of the city. It stands on the east side of Main Street, the fourth building north of Ninth Avenue. The lower story front room, about 25 by 50 feet, was occupied by Page as a billiard saloon, in which were a pool table and a counter and bar at the back end, where liquors were sold by the glass. Back of this was another room where card tables were kept. The upper story was divided into several rooms, some of which are supposed to have been occupied for gambling purposes. There have been rumors and surmises for several days past that green ones who have thought they were smart have been enticed into these rooms, where they lost their money; and now there are many dark hints being thrown out of drugged liquor, cold decks, pistols, roping in, etc., which in the present excitement it is impossible either to verify or refute. We are told that others have attempted to shoot Page but have been prevented by friends. Page leaves a wife, who was in a delicate situation, approaching confinement, and the effect of this blow may prove especially serious to her.

L. J. Webb is a young man about thirty years old, a bright lawyer, having a large practice and many friends. He had a few years ago habits of drinking and gambling, amounting to almost uncontrollable passion. Within the last three years he has made efforts to reform, joining the church and the temperance society, and has abstained from these vices so far that he regained the confidence of the people; and was in 1876 elected to the State Legislature, and has received of our citizens other marks of esteem and confidence. Since the Jay Page saloon as been opened, it seems that by some means he has been lured from his good resolutions and habits into drinking in this saloon and into gambling again, and has been taking opium to steady his nerves. It is said that he was in one of the rooms of that building all the night previous, where Page got away with his money by unfair dealing, and silenced him by a show of two pistols; that Webb left in a half demented condition, and under the influence of whiskey, drugs, and frenzy has perpetrated the homicide as above stated.

Webb has a wife and two children, to whom this tragedy will be the most terrible catastrophe.

The funeral of Page took place from the M. E. Church Sunday, June 2nd.

Webb was held over in jail to Monday for his preliminary examination. On Monday he was very low and weak; too ill to be moved, and his examination was postponed until his condition will permit of it. Dr. Davis, who is attending him, expresses the opinion that his mind was in a shattered condition.

Arkansas City Traveler, June 12, 1878.

Homicide.

[From the Winfield Courier.]

On last Saturday, June 1st, about four o’clock p.m., Jay Page, saloon keeper of this place, was shot and killed by L. J. Webb, attorney, and member of the House of Representatives of the State. Crowds of men immediately assembled around the scene of the transaction and great excitement prevailed. At the time of the shooting Mr. Page was standing against the counter of his saloon in conversation with Frank Manny, when Webb entered from the back room and walking up to within about twelve feet of Mr. Page, drew a revolver from his pocket and fired, the ball entering Page’s left breast about five inches above the nipple.

Page ran out the front door, blood gushing from his mouth and nostrils, crying that Webb had killed him. He ran along the sidewalk perhaps 100 feet and fell. He was taken up, bleeding from the mouth profusely. He expired immediately. No word was spoken in the saloon by either Webb or Page. After firing the shot Webb turned to the counter, where he handed his pistol to J. L. M. Hill, deputy sheriff, and went out in custody of Hill.

Coroner W. G. Graham caused to be summoned before him by J. H. Finch, deputy sheriff, a coroner’s jury, composed of W. Q. Mansfield, B. F. Baldwin, A. A. Jackson, H. Brotherton, A. E. Baird, and W. Gillelen.

Frank Manny, Newton Ball, and Jesse Herndon, eye witnesses to the transaction, were sworn and testified to the facts as above stated.

The jury returned a verdict to the effect that Jay Page came to his death by a shot from a pistol fired in the hands of J. L. Webb.

Jay Page came to this city from El Dorado in January last. He had formerly been in Topeka and cities further east. He was a young man of about thirty years of age, well formed, active, wiry, of good address and prepossessing appearance. He was a professional gambler, and is represented as having been not only skillful as a gambler but unprincipled, daring and reckless, one of the kind who are quick and handy with the pistol and have plenty of nerve to use it.

When Page came to this place he set himself to building a large stone two-story building with brick open front. The building was completed about six weeks ago, and is one of the large, substantial, and showy business houses of the city. It stands on the east side of Main street, the fourth building north of Ninth Avenue. The lower story front room, about 25 by 50 feet, was occupied by Page as a billiard saloon, in which were a pool table and a counter and bar at the back end where liquors were sold by the glass. Back of this was another room where card tables were kept.

The upper story was divided into several rooms, some of which are supposed to have been occupied for gambling purposes. There have been rumors and surmises for several days past that green ones who thought they were smart have been enticed into these rooms, where they lost their money; and now there are many dark hints being thrown out of drugged liquors, cold decks, pistols, roping in, etc., which in the present excitement it is impossible either to verify or refute. We are told that others have attempted to shoot Page, but have been prevented by friends. Page leaves a wife, who is in a delicate situation, approaching confinement, and the effect of this blow may prove especially serious to her.

L. J. Webb is a young man about thirty years old, a bright lawyer, having a large practice and many friends. He had, a few years ago, habits of drinking and gambling amounting to almost an uncontrollable passion. Within the last three years he has made efforts to reform, joining the church and the temperance society, and has abstained from these vices so far that he regained the confidence of the people; was in 1876 elected to the State Legislature, and has received from our citizens other marks of esteem and confidence.

Since the Jay Page saloon has been opened, it seems that by some means he has been lured from his good resolutions and habits into drinking in this saloon and into gambling again, and has been taking opium to steady his nerves. It is said that he was in one of the rooms of that building all the night previous, where Page got away with his money by unfair dealing, and silenced him by a show of two pistols; that Webb left in a half demented condition; and under the influence of whiskey, drugs, and frenzy, has perpetrated the homicide as above stated.

Webb has a wife and two children, to whom this tragedy will be the most terrible catastrophe.

The funeral of Page took place from the M. E. church Sunday, June 2nd.

Webb was held over in jail to Monday for his preliminary examination. On Monday he was very low and weak; too ill to be moved, and his examination was postponed until his condition will permit of it. Dr. Davis, who is attending him, expresses the opinion that his mind was in a shattered condition.

Winfield Courier, February 28, 1878.

In spite of old Prog. Tice, groundhog and goosebons, that terrible freeze out did not come in February and Lacy mourns his occupation gone. He should have secured a few sheets of that ice as thick as a pane of glass in November. Frank Manny proposes to import an ice machine at a cost of about $3,000.

Winfield Courier, March 14, 1878.

Mr. Frank Manny will want more than 5,000 bushels of barley the coming year and will have to buy in other counties and ship it here unless the farmers of this county produce it. He expects to pay St. Louis prices for it delivered at Winfield. The prices at St. Louis have been ranging from 50 to 75 cents for spring barley. Fall barley is usually some higher. A good crop of spring barley, such as may be expected on our soil if properly put in and cared for, is from 50 to 60 bushels per acre. Forty bushels would be a poor crop. To make barley raising most profitable, clean seed only should be sown. Oats are the worst enemy of barley and if sown with it will run the barley out. Place your seed in a tub of water and the barley will sink while the oats will swim. Skim or pour off the oats and use them for horse feed and then you have clean barley for seed.

Do not soak your barley more than can be helped, but sow at once on new plowed ground broadcast and harrow in. Harvest early, before fully ripe. If allowed to stand until dead ripe, the heads will break off and waste. Stack at once, before rain, and it will sweat and properly cure in the stack. Do not thresh until fully cured; if you do, it will heat and spoil in the granary.

Now this industry is the most promising of all the spring crops, and farmers should see that the required amount is produced at home. If an excess of this demand should be raised, it will pay for shipment better than wheat and is much more profitable for feed than oats. In Mexico and California barley is fed altogether and the horses are kept in first class condition at moderate expense. The Mennonites in Harvey and adjoining counties are making much more money on the barley raised and hauled 20 to 50 miles to the railroad, than is being made in their vicinity on any other crop.

If you do not know where to get the seed, call on Brotherton & Silvers, Winfield. They have it which is clean and lively.

Winfield Courier, June 13, 1878.

Various statements in relation to this affair have appeared in the newspapers or been told about the country which have no foundation in fact; but have grown out of the surmises of excited men. Much interest and a desire to learn the facts are manifested.

At the preliminary examination of Webb, the courtroom was well filled, largely with men from the country, and we consider it due to our readers to give them the exact facts as far as possible, and endeavored to do so last week.

We will state that we were not much acquainted with Page and were well acquainted with Webb, feeling for him a personal friendship; but we do not intend that this fact shall color our statements.

Our statement last week that Webb had been taking opium to steady his nerves was doubtless an error. It is denied, and we find no one who knows that he ever took opium.

The statement of the correspondent of the Traveler that Page had won from Webb $100, which Webb had collected for his clients, is in error.

C. C. Black, Webb’s law partner, says that Webb could not possibly have had any money belonging to clients. The statement in some of the papers that Webb had threatened to kill or revenge upon Page seems to be without foundation. No evidence of threats or malice was offered, or was attempted to be offered, at the examination.

If there is any evidence that Page had played cold decks on Webb, drugged him, or drawn pistols on him, it was not produced at the examination. There are many other statements and rumors that cannot be taken as truth, at least not until the case is fully developed at the trial.

THE PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION

took place last week, June 5th and 6th. Capt. McDermott, for the state, evidently endeavored to do his whole duty in an honorable way. Judge Coldwell, E. S. Torrance, N. C. Coldwell, and Judge Webb, the prisoner’s father, were present in the interest of Webb. The hearing was before Justice Boyer in the courthouse. Four witnesses were examined on the part of the state. The following are all the material facts testified.

JESSE HERNDON’S TESTIMONY.

I have been tending bar for Page lately. On the first day of June I was in Page’s saloon. Mr. Page was there. I saw L. J. Webb there; saw him shoot Page. Page was standing at the north end of the bar, front side, leaning against the bar talking to Frank Manny. Webb came into the room at the back door, walked to within about ten feet of Page, took his pistol out of his pocket, and pointed it towards Page. The pistol made a report and I saw the smoke. Page put up his hand to his left breast and said: "See where the son of a b___h has shot me."

Page walked out of the front door. I did not see Webb do anything after that. He gave his pistol to Mr. Hill. I did not see Mr. Page anymore until about half an hour, when I saw him in the doctor’s office dead. What I have described transpired in Cowley County, Kansas, about 4 o’clock p.m., Saturday, June 1, 1878.

CROSS-EXAMINATION.

I have been in Page’s employ about two months. Mr. Page sold whiskey and wine and allowed gambling in his place of business. The room I have described was the retail room. The gambling was carried on in the back room on the same floor. There were other rooms for gambling upstairs, but they did not gamble there. There might have been one or two gambling games up there. The building was well constructed for gambling purposes.

I have known Webb nearly all the time I have been here; had seen him about the building before. He was there the Friday evening before; came after supper and remained all night and next day until the shooting took place. He did not leave the house to my knowledge until the shooting. Had he left I think I would have known it. He was in the back room where they were playing poker most of the time he was in the house. Page was engaged in the game. Page would frequently go from the gambling room to the bar room and help his customers to some of the good things he had there. Mr. Webb drank during the night and during the day. I think he took the last drink about thirty minutes before the shooting. During the time Webb was there he might have drunk more than thirty times. He was drinking all the time. I waited on them during the time he was there. The game broke up about daylight. Page did not play any after that. They all drank the same kind of liquor, not mixed liquor but whiskey; they call it bean whiskey. I took some peppermint to Webb once. I prepared all the liquor they drank that night except one round. Page gave them one round about midnight. I was most of the time in the gaming room. Webb was playing all the time until 4 o’clock. Page then quit the game because there was no more money in it. He had got it all. Webb continued drinking all day. I did not observe anything peculiar about Webb when he came out at the time of the shooting. Do not know whether Page had been in the gambling room that afternoon. If he was in there, I do not know it. I had passed a drink through a hole in the wall into the gambling room to Webb about twenty minutes before the shooting.

Frank Manny testified to the circumstances of the shooting substantially as did Herndon, and said he saw Webb in the gambling room about ten minutes before the shooting playing cards with two other men; said Webb when he came into the room looked as though he was mad; had his eyes wide open and looked toward Page with a hard stare. Webb leveled his pistol so long at Page before firing that witness thought it was a joke intended to scare somebody.

Newton Ball and H. A. Adams testified to the facts of the shooting substantially as Herndon had, and Dr. Mansfield testified to the surgical results. No witnesses were produced on behalf of the prisoner. His counsel evidently preferred not to disclose their line of defense.

The Justice ordered that Webb be committed to jail to await his trial at the September term of the district court. An application that he be admitted to bail was refused and the prisoner was returned to jail.

There is a wide difference of opinion in this community as to the merits or demerits of this case and some feeling is exhibited. We do not propose to state our opinions, but only to state the facts as they are developed. It is probable that much other evidence will be adduced at the trial, and until then we think all should avoid forming fixed opinions.

Winfield Courier, July 4, 1878.

Frank Manny drilled a well one hundred and twelve feet for water, but failed to find enough until the big rain came.

Winfield Courier, September 19, 1878.

The case was called on Monday morning, September 9th, on the opening of the court. Defendant made application for a continuance because of the absence of Dr. Mendenhall, a material witness for the defense. The court held the showing sufficient, unless the State would admit the affidavit of defendant as the testimony of witness. The State consented and the case was set for trial next morning.

All day Tuesday was spent in getting a jury. The special venire was soon exhausted and balance was made up of tradesmen. It is considered a good jury, and both State and defendant are satisfied. Most of them are from the country.

Wednesday, Jas. McDermott opened the case on the part of the State. Frank Manny, Jessi Herndon, Adams, and others were examined as witnesses. There were no new features developed on the part of the State. The testimony was substantially as on the preliminary examination. The killing was proved and some evidence tending to show expressions of previous malice was introduced.

Col. James D. Snoddy, of counsel for the defense, cross-examined Frank Manny, and when he concluded, the witness left the stand in a rather shattered condition.

The evidence for the State was concluded Wednesday evening. During the night session, Judge Coldwell stated the case for the defense. The theory of the defense was insanity at the time of the shooting; that this insanity was caused by excessive excitement, loss of sleep, excessive drinking, and nux vomica, opium, and other poisonous drugs administered to him in his drinks. In his youth defendant had suffered a severe fracture of the skull, the walls being permanently pressed upon the brain, wounding and lacerating it; and in time of great excitement he is peculiarly liable to insanity, that the place of the killing was a dead-fall of the worst type.

One of the most important witnesses for the defense was Jessie Herndon, the principal witness for the State. As is known, he was Page’s barkeeper and knew all about how the business of the house was conducted. The defense had endeavored to draw out this testimony on cross-examination but the court would not permit it, and he was put on as a witness for the defense. He testified as to all the occurrences of the night previous to the killing and made many important additions to his testimony. He said that Page deliberately robbed Webb that night by means of cold decks and drugged whiskey; that Webb drank often that night, and Page had instructed witness to give Webb liquor from a particular bottle he called "all sorts," which witness did; that twice during the night Page went into the bar-room and put some liquid from a small vial which he took from his pocket into a tumbler of whiskey and instructed witness to give it to Webb the next time he called for drink, which witness did; that this bottle of "all sorts" was a villainous compound of whiskey and drugs, which Page kept for the express purpose of giving to men with whom he was gaming; that shortly before the conclusion of the game, and after Webb had drunk the whiskey prepared by Page, Page went into the bar-room and stacked a deck of cards, and instructed witness the next time drinks were called for to bring this pack under the water or server, and while Webb was engaged in drinking to leave them under the server on the table, which witness did, and then Page dealt from this cold deck, giving Webb a full hand and himself a better hand, on which he won all Webb’s money, and this concluded the game. Witness testified to some expressions of anger made by Webb to Page upon the conclusion of the game, saying he was robbed, but to no expressions of malice or threats of revenge. All the parties to the game remained an hour or more after its conclusion, Webb drinking frequently; then all left except Webb, who remained alone with witness. Webb never left the saloon from that time to the time of the shooting. Witness testified as to Webb’s condition and appearance during the day; said he looked very wild and had a jerking movement about his head, neck, and shoulders, was convulsive, and breathed hard. Witness testified that after the preliminary examination he went with By Terrill and Frank Manny to the saloon to make an examination for drugs. They washed out several empty bottles and one bottle that contained something that Page had used to put in liquor; what it was he did not know. When they emptied it out and washed the bottle, he told Terrill and Manny that it was not right. He testified that certain vials and small bottles shown him looked like those which Page had used to fix up liquors with.

This witness suffered considerably in the hands of W. E. Stanley, attorney for State, on cross-examination. His attention was called to statements he had made before Justice Boyer at the preliminary examination in direct contradiction to his present statements. These contra-dictions witness explained by saying he had been advised by certain friends of Page that if he told anything he knew about these transactions in the saloon they would let Webb go and send witness up; that from those threats and the general excitement he was afraid to tell all he knew about that saloon.

Further testimony for the defense from Burt Covert, G. L. Walker, James Fahey, P. Hill, A. H. Green, R. F. Baldwin, Ed. Bedilion, and Dr. W. R. Davis corroborated Herndon in relation to the wild and insane appearance, the convulsive twitching movements of the throat, head, and shoulders of the defendant immediately before and subsequent to the shooting; also showed the finding of some small bottles and vials in the counter used by Page in his saloon; that these vials were taken from the counter sometime after the shooting and preserved with their contents and are the same that are now exhibited in court; and the testimony of Drs. Davis, Rothrock, and Furley showed that these vials contained opium, nux vomica, and India hemp, and that these compounded and administered would produce the symptoms described in the defendant and would produce insanity.

The jury than examined the indentation which is apparent on defendant’s head. From inspection it appeared that a considerable portion of the skull had been formerly removed, and that the left side of the skull is pressed in upon the brain.

The medical gentlemen testified that such is a frequent cause of insanity, and that any person thus afflicted was extremely liable to mental derangement or insanity in any unusual excitement, or the excessive use of intoxicating liquors, or of such drugs as had been found in the vials.

Thursday, Friday, and a part of Saturday were occupied with the testimony for the defense. Rebutting testimony was then offered by both State and defense but was of little importance. The testimony in many important points was conflicting.

On Saturday evening the evidence was all in and the court adjourned to Monday morning, when the court will give his charge to the jury and the arguments of counsel will be heard.

On Monday morning, the 16th, the Judge gave his charge to the jury, and was followed by W. E. Stanley in the opening argument for the State. Stanley scored the defendant and many of the witnesses for the defense fearfully and evidently with great effect. His plea was long and pronounced to have been brilliant to a high degree. He was followed by Judge Coldwell for the defense. This is the latest news we get as we go to press.

Winfield Courier, October 31, 1878.

The Winfield gun club have received their glass balls, and tomorrow afternoon at two o’clock they will have a shoot northeast of town on Manny’s farm.

Winfield Courier, November 7, 1878.

Last Friday the Gun Club had their first glass ball shooting match with the following score. This is the first shoot and the score is not very good, but we hope that the next score will give a better showing. Dick Gates carried off the leather medal.

Winfield Courier, November 21, 1878.

Scores given for gun club meeting called the "glass ball shooting" last Friday. Participants listed: Bert Crapster, F. C. Nommsen, Frank Manny, B. M. Terrell. "And now the shining leather medal hangs upon the heaving bosom of Bert Crapster."

Winfield Courier, December 5, 1878.

The score of the shooting match last Thursday is as follows: Dick Gates, 10; Frank Manny, 9; James Vance, 9; Charles Steuven, 9; B. M. Terrill, 5; Bert. Crapster, 2; S. Suss, 3; Ed. Clisbee, 2; F. Nommsen, 1.

Winfield Courier, Thursday, January 2, 1879.

The following is a list of new buildings erected in the city of Winfield since January 1, 1878, with the name of owner and cost of building.

Frank Manny, brewery and ice house, stone: $13,000.

Arkansas City Traveler, February 26, 1879.

James Kelly, ex-Post Master at Winfield, was shot on Saturday last by Manny, of that town. Kelly is said to have received two loads of bird shot in his side, and his condition is very serious. We have heard two or three different reports of the affair, and all point to whiskey as playing a full hand at the game.

Arkansas City Traveler, March 12, 1879.

An action has been brought in the District Court by James Kelly vs. Frank Manny, for civil damages, arising from assault with that shot gun.

Arkansas City Traveler, June 4, 1879.

Judgment was rendered in the criminal cases at the late term of the District Court as follows:

STATE VS. FRANK MANNY: fined $350.

STATE VS. FRANCIS SMALL: sentenced to 5 years in the penitentiary at hard labor.

STATE VS. DAVID CREEK: 4 years in the penitentiary.

STATE VS. HENRY MOUNT: fined $100.

Winfield Courier, February 27, 1879.

On last Saturday morning, James Kelly, ex-postmaster and once editor of the COURIER, was shot by Frank Manny, proprietor of the brewery northeast of town. The particulars are, as near as we can learn, as follows.

Mr. Kelly, it seems, attended the phantom ball Friday night to see that the lights, fire, etc., were all right (as he has been doing in the absence of Mr. Manning), and having a key to the back door, came in that way. The managers of the ball objected to his coming in without a ticket, and ordered him to leave; and upon his refusing, Frank Manny and Ed Nickerson dragged him upstairs from the dressing room, across the stage, and pushed him down the front steps. In the morning Mr. Kelly borrowed the delivery wagon of Baird Bros., and asking Charles Payson to "take a ride with him," proceeded to the brewery northeast of town, where he found Frank Manny at work on his new stone building. On coming in sight of Manny, Kelly said, "There’s the man I want to see," and handing the lines to Payson, jumped out of the wagon, upon which Manny started on a run for his house. Kelly called out to him to stop; that he wanted to see him. Manny ran on to the house, which is near the brewery building, and procured a shotgun, which he loaded, and returning to the scene of action, met Kelly coming from the ice house, northwest of the stone building, and commanded Kelly to leave his premises or he would shoot him. Kelly told him to lay down his gun, as they could settle their matter in a minute without it, at the same time advancing toward him. They were about forty feet apart when Manny appeared with his gun. Manny, in an excited manner, kept ordering Kelly off, threatening to shoot while Kelly kept advancing toward him, saying repeatedly that he (Manny) would not shoot anybody.

This was continued until Manny pushed him (Kelly) off with the muzzle of the gun, again telling him to leave the place or he would shoot him. Kelly opened his coat and told him he "didn’t think he would shoot anybody." Manny then stepped back about thirty feet, at the same time remarking that he "would see whether he would shoot or not," and fired one barrel, which took effect in Kelly’s arm and thigh, and turned him partly around. Manny then fired the other barrel, hitting Kelly in the right leg, and then drew a pistol and walked up to Kelly, telling him that if he did not get off his premises, he would bore a hole through him. Kelly then got into the wagon and was brought to town. He was placed under the care of Dr. Graham, who pronounced him not dangerously hurt. Manny was arrested, and waiving examination, was held to bail in $2,000 to answer the charge of shooting with intent to kill, at the next term of the district court.

We wish to state in connection with this that Charles Payson knew nothing of the affair of the previous evening, when asked by Kelly to go with him, and had no suspicions of anything wrong until they arrived at the brewery.

Winfield Courier, May 1, 1879.

The following is a list of cases that will stand for trial at the May, A. D. 1879, term of the District Court of Cowley County, beginning on the first Monday in May, and have been placed on the Trial Docket in the following order.

FIRST DAY - CRIMINAL DOCKET.

State vs. Frank Manny.

SIXTH DAY - CIVIL DOCKET.

Burrough & Spach vs. Frank Manny.

EIGHTH DAY - CIVIL DOCKET.

James Kelly vs. Frank Manny.

Winfield Courier, May 8, 1879.

We are under many obligations to Mr. Frank Manny for a nice chunk of ice last week.

Winfield Courier, May 8, 1879.

The court commenced its session on Monday. His Honor W. P. Campbell presiding. Present: E. S. Bedilion, clerk; C. L. Harter, sheriff; E. S. Torrance, prosecuting attorney, and a full corps of local attorneys.

All civil cases were continued over to next week.

TUESDAY.

State against Frank Manny, shooting of James Kelly. Trial commenced and the testimony of James Kelly was in progress when the court adjourned for the day.

Winfield Courier, May 15, 1879.

The case of the State vs. Manny occupied the time of the court up to last Friday evening, when the jury brought in a verdict of assault and battery. The punishment is a fine not exceeding $500 and imprisonment not exceeding one year.

Defendant’s counsel gave notice of a motion for a new trial.

Winfield Courier, May 22, 1879.

Judgment was rendered in the criminal cases at the late term of the District Court, as follows.

State vs. Frank Manny: fined $350.

Winfield Courier, June 5, 1879.

Frank Manny has a new ice and beer wagon.

Winfield Courier, August 21, 1879.

(Commencing Monday, Aug. 25, 1879.)

James Kelly F. S. Jennings

vs.

Frank Manny Hackney & McDonald

Winfield Courier, August 28, 1879.

The District Court convened Monday afternoon, of last week, and the following cases were disposed of upon call of the Docket.

James Kelly vs. Frank Manny. Defendant made application for change of venue.

James Kelly vs. Frank Manny.

Arkansas City Traveler, December 3, 1879.

District Court Docket.

The following is a list of cases that will stand for trial at the December term, A. D. 1879, of the District Court of Cowley county, and have been placed on the Trial Docket, in the following order.

James Kelly vs Frank Manny.

Winfield Courier, January 8, 1880.

The following is a list of cases that will stand for trial at the adjourned December, 1879 term of the district court, beginning on Monday, the 15th day of January, 1880.

AMONG THE CIVIL DOCKETS....

James Kelly vs. Frank Manny.

Winfield Courier, June 24, 1880.

Mr. Frank Manny has fixed up near his brewery one of the finest parks in southwestern Kansas. He has laid it off into walks and drives, with beautiful beds of flowers, rustic arbors, swings, and other attractive features. His intention is to make it a place of resort where all classes can repair with their families and enjoy a pleasant afternoon, and so far he seems to be succeeding admirably. Mr. Manny allows no disreputable characters to enter the grounds, and upon our visit there we saw nothing that could be objected to by the most fastidious. The use of the grounds is offered free to the schools or Sunday schools for picnic purposes, the only proviso being that the children be accompanied by their teachers, who are expected to keep the flowers, arbors, etc., from being injured.

Winfield Courier, August 5, 1880.

On the first day of August 1834 the slaves in all the British colonies were emancipated, and last Monday the colored people of the Arkansas Valley celebrated the event in Winfield.

There were about 300 colored people present, mainly from Winfield, Wichita, Wellington, and Arkansas City.

Williamson Thomas was the president of the day; L. C. Scott was grand marshal; Wm. Brown and Carter, assistant marshals, and John Turner, Carter, and Brown the committee on arrangements.

A procession, led by the colored band of martial music, was formed at the Santa Fe depot and marched to the ground, Frank Manny’s garden and park, where the Rev. Weir made an introductory address, and Rev. Daily made the opening prayer.

Judge Coldwell was the orator of the day and made an eloquent and appropriate address, which was listened to attentively and broadly applauded by his appreciative hearers. After the address a banquet was served, at which Judge Coldwell and the county commissioners were honored guests.

In the evening the religious part of the company held an entertainment at the courthouse and the others held a ball at Manning’s Opera House. Both parties were conducted pleasantly and were highly enjoyed.

There are about 125 colored people in Winfield of whom about 50 are exodusters. The latter have plenty of work, are doing well, and feel that they have escaped untold barbarities. The colored people here are generally good citizens and industrious.

Winfield Courier, August 19, 1880.

Dan Miller has opened a stone blacksmith shop near Manny’s brewery.

Winfield Courier, August 19, 1880.

Persons wishing to purchase lots in this cemetery or wishing to have graves dug, will please call on James H. Land, near Manny’s brewery. W. G. GRAHAM, Secretary.

Arkansas City Traveler, Wednesday, September 1, 1880. Front Page.

COURT DOCKET.

Cowley County District Court calendar, August term, 1880.

CIVIL DOCKET.

Winfield Courier, November 25, 1880.

Frank Manny talks of converting his brewery into a flouring mill. Good for Frank.

Winfield Courier, November 25, 1880.

Trial docket for December term, commencing on the first Monday (6th day) of December, A. D. 1880:

SECOND DAY, CIVIL DOCKET.

James Kelly vs. Frank Manny.

Arkansas City Traveler, December 1, 1880.

COWLEY CO. DISTRICT COURT.

Trial docket for December term, commencing on the first Monday (6th day) of December, A. D., 1880.

SECOND DAY, CIVIL DOCKET.

James Kelly vs. Frank Manny.

Winfield Courier, December 9, 1880.

Last week Frank Manny put up one hundred tons of ice, five and a half inches thick.

Winfield Courier, December 30, 1880.

Frank Manny always keeps us on the jump to know what he is going to do next. He is now engaged in making hot-houses and he already has three thousand exotics and is propagating thousands more. Hereafter it will not be necessary for us to go abroad for house plants.

CIVIL DOCKET.

Patrick Harkins vs. David F. Edmonds.

C. C. Harris vs. Sanford Day.

Mercy M. Funk vs. Cynthia Clark, et al.

W. H. H. Marris vs. T. W. Gant, et al.

James Kelly vs. Frank Manny.

Winfield Courier, January 20, 1881.

The polls for Walnut township will be in the second house west of the old Maris residence near Manny’s brewery. J. C. ROBERTS, Trustee.

Winfield Courier, January 20, 1881.

Winfield Courier, January 27, 1881.

Frank Manny has gone to Germany on business and pleasure.

Winfield Courier, January 27, 1881.

Mr. Frank Manny left Monday for Hamburg, Germany. He will be absent about sixty days.

Winfield Courier, February 3, 1881.

Frank Manny left last Monday for a visit to the Fatherland, and expects to be absent about sixty days. He has just finished putting up two thousand tons of ice, and thinks he has earned a rest.

Frank Manny returned from Germany last week. He looks as if the smell of salt water was healthy.

Winfield Courier, April 21, 1881.

Frank Manny was indicted by the U. S. Grand Jury last week for neglecting to post his internal revenue license. He was fined fifty dollars and costs, amounting in all to one hundred and eighty dollars. Such mistakes are liable any time to occur, and it does not seem fair to fine a man for a failure to post his license in a conspicuous place after he has paid the government for it.

Winfield Courier, April 28, 1881.

CRIMINAL DOCKET: STATE OF KANSAS VERSUS 59 CASES...

Theo Miller, R. Ehret, Jos. Whiteman, Frank Manny, John Himelspach, James Fahey, Frank Merrill, Stephen O’Lane, Theo R. Timme, Thos. H. Benning, E. A. Henthorn, Geo. Miller, B. M. Terrill, Joe R. Smith, A. W. Patterson, Harry Bahntge, David Harter, A. H. Green, Barney Shrivers, Thos. Wright, Sid S. Major, W. A. Gibbs, S. S. Moore, Geo. Corwin, Ed G. Cole, A. Hatfield, ____ Squires, John Custer, Wayne Bitting, Ed Appling, Ed Howell, S. R. Walcott, W. L. Mullen, H. Jochems, James Allen, L. J. Webb, Ed Collins, Sol Frazier, R. Ehret, Major F. Moss, Geo. Haywood, E. B. Weitzel, Allison Toops, Willie Fogg, Alex May.

CIVIL DOCKET: 120 CASES.

Patrick Harkins vs. David F. Edmons; C. C. Harris vs. Sanford Day; Mercy M. Funk vs. Cinthia Clark et al; W. W. H. Maris vs. T. W. Gant et al; James Kelly vs. Frank Manny; J. A. Myton vs. S. H. Myton et al; M. E. Bolton vs. Caroline Arnold; S. D. Pryor et al vs. M. L. Read et al; John Lowry vs. C S & Ft S R R Co; Seymour Tyrant vs. David Hitchcock; Same vs. C. L. Harter et al; John Pittinger vs. Samuel B. Atkinson et al; B. B. Vandeventer vs. S K & W R R Co.; John S. Mann vs. J. D. Burt et al; John B. Lynn vs. S K & W R R Co.; M. L. Read vs. Francis M. Small et al; M. L. Read vs. John J. Breene et al; Curns & Manser vs. Warren Gillelen; J. W. Lane vs. T. S. Green; John Stuart vs. B. Corrygan; Edward Geist vs. same; John Templeton vs. same; J. E. Hayner & Co. vs. H. L. Cowles; Wm. D. Rason vs. John Brooks; Emma J. Keffer vs. George Brown et al; Albert P. Johnson vs S K & W R R Co.; Oscar F. Weeks vs. same; Martha C. Dyer vs. Andrew R. Wilson; Daniel Bell vs. County Commissioners; E. M. Bird vs. same; J. R. Harmon vs. same; C. C. Hollister vs. same; Sarilda Paxton vs. Clayton A. Paxton; Miles L. Smith vs. W. P. Olney et al; Henry S. Ireton vs. Charles A. Bliss; D. M. Osburn vs. Godfrey Mast et al; Harry McNeil vs. A. T. Shenneman; John Moffit vs. John Smiley et al; Same vs. Thomas Wright et al; Joseph W. Pugsley vs A. T. Shenneman; Mary Lawson vs. Peter Lawson; Wyland J. Keffer vs. T. B. Norman; McCord, Nave & Co. vs. A. T. Shenneman; City of Winfield vs. Joseph Poor; Malin Fowler & Co. vs. Knisley & Bowles; John Himelspach vs. same; Ida Arnold vs. Elizabeth Dressel et al; John B. Fleming vs. C. C. Krow; Winfield Bank vs. T. M. Linscott; Moore Brothers vs. J. H. McBerth [? McBeth would seem more like it ?]; J. L. Byers vs.

W. B. Seward et al; M. L. Read vs. H. Tisdale et al; Basheba Goodell vs. Charles Goodell; W. H. Fritch vs. T. M. Maddox; Robert Allison vs. James Finch; Frank C. Wood vs. Geo. H. McIntire; Hackney & McDonald vs. Bolton and Creswell townships; Thomas J. Jackson vs. James P. Williams et al; James P. Walch vs. Knisley & Bowles; S. L. Brettun vs. Jacob G. Titus et al; Field, Leiter & Co. vs. A. T. Shenneman; M. L. Read vs. John L. Rusbridge; Brotherton and Silver vs. Elmer V. Stevens; H. P. Farrar vs. E. R. C. Gray; John B. Tallman vs. John H. Willis et al; James L. Huey vs. Agnes Wilson; George B. Green vs. James Harden; Libby & Moody vs. James Harden; Almost Wiley vs. James Harden; R. L. McDonald & Co. vs. Agnes Wilson; Tennent Walker and Company vs. Agnes Wilson; Evan Richards et al vs. S. B. Littell; Aultman & Taylor Co. vs. George Hafer; Winfield Bank vs. H. F. Burnett; Rosanna E. Sydall vs. James H. Finch; W. M. Wyeth & Co. vs. P. J. Sydall; S. P. Kinsley vs. A. T. Shenneman; Frank S. Sydall vs. James H. Finch; T. E. Lewis vs. E. A. Wilson; In the matter of W. M. Null for mill dam; Adolphus H. Green vs. E. F. Widner et al; Daniel Sheels vs. G. E. Bradt et al; M. Brettun vs. Alvin E. McDeed; Rufus B. Wait vs. E. E. Lewis; M. L. Read vs. Samuel C. Fitzgerald; F. E. Lewis vs. Charles Jones; S. B. Tucker vs. O. F. Boyle et al; Nancy A. Snodgrass vs. John Snodgrass; Jennie P. Coleman vs. Geo. W. Coleman; L. Lowenstein vs. B. Saddler; Mary Lewes vs. Lewis Sherbino; J. E. Hoyt vs. A. T. Shenneman; Comstock, Castle & Co. vs. E. S. Rose; Elijah Wells vs. Nancy J. Wells; Rilda P. Hughes vs. Charles Marshall; Robert E. Wallace vs. Martin West; March C. Anderson vs. Wm. D. Anderson; Margaret J. Manning vs. Edwin C. Manning; Almira I. Clay vs. Wm. Clay; Hattie B. Fuller vs. J. S. Chick; Jostin [?] Hollister vs. John L. Morton et al; John W. Sargeant vs. Susan Sargeant; John Lowry vs. F. A. Osborn; Aultman Taylor & Co. vs. Reuben Corman et al; Wm. C. Hatchings vs. Thomas Copeland; Mason & Tulle vs. Malinda Clay et al; Frank J. Sydall vs. James H. Finch; N. C. Myers vs. Elijah Murphey et al; Quincy A. Glass vs. School District 123; John Rhodes vs. John T. Quarrels; James E. Searl vs. Overa Y. Searl; Simmons and Ott vs. J. B. Williams et al; Thos. James vs. James Boyd.

Arkansas City Traveler, May 4, 1881. Front Page.

TRIAL DOCKET DISTRICT COURT, MAY TERM, 1881.

STATE OF KANSAS VERSUS—

Theo Miller. R. Ehret. Jos. Whiteman. Frank Manny. John Himselspach. James Fahey. Frank Merrill. Stephen O’Lane. Theo R. Timme. Thos. H. Benning. E. H. Henthorn. Geo. Miller. B. M. Terrill. Jno. R. Smith. A. W. Patterson. Harry Bahntge. David Harter. A. H. Green. Barney Shrivers. Thos. Wright. Sid S. Major. W. A. Gibbs. S. S. Moore. Geo. Corwin. Ed H. Cole. A. Hatfield. Squires. John Custer. Wayne Bitting. Ed Appling. Ed Rowell. S. R. Walcott. W. L. Mullin. H. Jochems. James Allen. L. J. Webb. Ed Collins. Sol. Frazier. R. Ehret. Major F. Moss. Geo. Haywood. E. B. Weitzel. Allison Toops. Willie Fogg. Alex May.

Winfield Courier, May 5, 1881.

Prohibition in Kansas.

We have received many letters from Iowa and other states containing a letter written by Frank Manny, of this city, clipped from one newspaper or another, with the inquiry if the statements therein contained are true. We answered one of these briefly last week, but subsequently we learn that the Manny letter is being published widely in other states, not only as an argument against prohibitory liquor laws, but against emigrating to Kansas, and particularly against this city and county. It is known that Winfield and Cowley County are the

BANNER CITY AND COUNTY

for prohibition. The vote on the prohibitory amendment last November was in Winfield 443 for, and 121 against. Majority for: 322. In Cowley County the vote stood, 3,248 for, and 870 against. Majority for, 2,373. No other city or county in the state gave anything like such majorities for, and most cities as large or larger than Winfield gave majorities against. If prohibition is disastrous to a community, it is fit that this city and county be the heaviest sufferers. If it is a good thing, this city and county should come in for a goodly share of the benefits. This city and county are only eleven years old. In that time they have risen from nothing to a population of 21,539 for the county, and 2,850 for the city, according to the U. S. census of 1880, and the population of the city today is not less than 3,300. Of these eleven years, nine of them have been years of magnificent crops of all kinds, and two of them have been years of partial failure. The first year of short crops was 1874, and the following spring showed a decrease of population and a stagnation of business. The other year of short crops was 1880, which was even worse than 1874, and the result on the population and business this spring will appear in the statements which follow. Either in consequence of, or in spite of the fact that intoxicating liquors have always been sold here in any abundance, we have arisen from nothing to one of the best and wealthiest counties in the west in eleven years. Was it whiskey, or was it our wonderfully fertile soil, fine climate, and attractive surroundings?

"WINFIELD, KANS., April 1st, 1881.

Herewith I send you a car load of barley, which please sell for me and remit proceeds after deducting all expenses. I have tried my best to dispose of it in our neighboring towns, but have not succeeded. I have invested $20,000 in my brewery, and I do not believe I could get $500 for it now on account of the prohibition law. I have over $1,000 worth of beer in my vaults and am not allowed to sell a drop. My barley and malt cost me 95 cents a bushel, but I cannot get 50 cents for it now. You have no idea how our people are upset by the new law. A year ago our town was prospering, not a house or store to be had, and now you will find from 100 to 150 houses vacated. Stores that brought $50 a month rent are empty. The state of affairs is such that even our prohibition people are getting scared and regret what they have done. If you should find anything for me there, please let me know.

FRANK MANNY."

Below are statements of businessmen and leading citizens of this city and county.

COLE BROTHERS

Druggists: Our trade is better than it was a year ago, retail not so good but have done more jobbing trade. We account for a falling off in retail by the fact that people have less money and there is very little sickness. It is much healthier through the country than a year ago. Do not see that the prohibition affects the trade. We shall not take out a license to sell liquor for medical purposes until a supreme court decision defines what the law is. We do not think it safe to make the required bond under the present state of doubt. We will not evade the law in any particular.

E. W. HOVEY & CO., DRUGGIST.

My business has improved every month I have been here and this last month is the best I have had. There is not much sickness. The doctors say it is distressingly healthy, so our prescription business is not as large as it would otherwise be. I do not know as the prohibitory law has had any effect on our trade as yet, but after today (April 30) I shall not sell liquor for medical or other purpose and shall not take out a permit at least for the present. This will not reduce my sales perceptibly for very little liquor enters into prescriptions.

QUINCY GLASS, DRUGGIST.

My general trade is better than it was a year ago. My prescription trade is less, because there is less sickness. I account for a better general trade by having a better stock and better location. I do not think the prohibitory law has affected my trade in any way. After May first I do not intend to sell liquor on prescriptions and that will effect my trade but slightly.

After the supreme court shall have defined the law, I shall decide my course, but at present I do not deem it prudent to give bond and take out a permit. The law is putting druggists in an unpleasant situation, but the idea that it will be a damage to the city and county is all nonsense.

HENRY BROWN & SON,

Druggists and Booksellers: Don’t think our trade is quite so good as it was a year ago, but it is very good, much better than we expected. Our trade would be much better ordinarily, but there is very little call for medicines and almost no sickness in the county. Physicians are all complaining of little business. We are going to take out a license, and sell for legitimate purposes in a legitimate way, and the prohibitory law will not affect this part of our trade in any way. We like the law and are going to support it. We have commenced to build a new house for our business. It will be 23 x 77, two stories and basement, of Winfield stone with brick front, iron columns, and plate glass, and will cost $3,500.

JOHN FLEMING, M. D., DRUGGIST.

My trade is about 25 percent better than it was a year ago, on account of a wider acquaintance. The health of the country is better than it was a year ago, scarcely any ill health. I do not think prohibition effects my trade in any way.

T. K. JOHNSTON, DRUGGIST.

There is a material falling off in my business as compared with a year ago. I think it is one third less. I do not attribute this to a bad year for crops last season. I do not think it was a bad year. The county produced a large corn crop, which has been fed out, and an unusually large number of hogs have been marketed at good prices. A great many cattle have been marketed, a great deal of flour and wheat has been turned off, an unusual amount of butter, eggs, etc., has been sold, and I believe the farmers received more money than ever before. I intend to go west and find a place where I can do business with some degree of freedom. Under the prohibition law it is not safe to give bond and sell drugs for there are so many things in the drug and medicine line which contain alcohol in some proportion that one will be caught by some enemy before he is aware of breaking the law and his bond is forfeited. The law prohibits the sale of drugs containing alcohol, except by going through a routine that I do not intend to undertake.

D. V. COLE, M. D.

I think the State Convention of Physicians will pass a resolution to refuse to take the oath required, and to prescribe alcoholic liquors. I have heretofore rarely prescribed such and then mostly at the request of patients. I have heretofore rarely prescribed such and then mostly at the request of patients. There is no necessity of prescribing such, except in very rare cases such as snake bite. In an emergency I would not hesitate to use the necessary means to save life. I do not think there is anything in the law to prevent me.

T. M. McGUIRE, GROCER.

My business is double what it was a year ago. Since the saloons were closed, my business has been about double what it was before. There are as many grocery stocks in town as there were a year ago. I attribute the increase in my trade to having a better stock, a better location, and to not having a noisy saloon beside me to drive away my best customers, and to the fact some men spend more money for groceries than formerly. For the last two months my Saturday cash receipts for goods have run from $143 to $233 per day. I have been out in the surrounding country and find an unusual amount of farm work and improvements going on.

HARTER BROTHERS, DRUGGISTS.

Our trade is good but not so good as a year ago. There are reasons why it should be less. Poor crops and less sickness, are principal. It is too early to tell what the effect of the prohibitory law is or will be. We shall not take a druggist’s license at present, but await a decision of the supreme court to define the meaning of the law, and in the meantime shall not sell liquor for medical or any other purpose.

GEO. EMERSON, M. D.

There is and has been very little sickness in this county all winter and spring, much less than usual. I do not attribute this to the operation of the prohibitory law. The State Medical Society meets on May 10th. Until then I do not intend to take the oath or to prescribe liquors. I do not intend to let anyone die on account of it, but shall administer it myself when necessary. I think the law needs to be authoritatively defined by the courts and then our profession will fall in to help carry out the law. We hold off a little now as a matter of prudence.

HARTER & HORNING,

Tunnel Water Mills: We are making 20,000 pounds of flour per day, which is about the same amount we were making a year ago. There are six flouring mills running in the county while only five were running a year ago. There is plenty of wheat in the county to keep the mills running until the next crop. There is much less wheat being shipped from this county than a year ago. I suppose about 1,200 bushels has been shipped within the last thirty days.

I don’t think prohibition effects this business in any way as yet. I do not think the wheat crop of this county the past year was over 300,000 bushels. An average crop would have been over 1,000,000 bushels. The present promise is a very good crop for this year. The acreage is greater than last year and we may reasonably expect a crop of 1,200,000 bushels. Prices are about the same as a year ago and have been very steady for a year. We have formerly shipped much of our flour to Colorado and New Mexico.

J. S. MANN,

Dealer in clothing, gents’ furnishing goods, hats, caps, boots, and shoes: My trade is less than it was a year ago, but I have demand for a better class of goods than was wanted a year ago. I do not think that prohibition affects my trade in any way.

C. H. ROBINSON,

Loan agent: My business is better than a year ago, because of more confidence in the future of this county and in the value of securities. Men are building fine buildings and making substantial improvements who would not have done so had the saloons remained.

J. B. EVANS, FARMER.

I live in Vernon township, Cowley County. There is more building going on than there was a year ago. Some of them are very fine improvements. There has much more farm work been done and better done than last year. The prospects for peaches, apples, and all kinds of fruits were never better. Corn is up and looking well. Oats look fine, but wheat is not as promising as it has been some years. Gardens are in excellent promise. There are several newcomers in this township and a demand for farms to rent much greater than the supply.

CURNS & MANSER,

Real estate, loan, and insurance agents: Our business generally is about the same as a year ago. The value of real estate in both city and county, has appreciated during the last year. Farms are held firmer and at higher prices than a year ago. There is more being done in the way of building and other improvements than ever before. Farmers are doing their work better and putting in their crops in better shape. The cultivated acreage is much greater than a year ago. An immense amount of prairie breaking is being done. More tree planting is being done than ever before. We travel over the county frequently and have had plenty of opportunities to observe. A considerable number of new settlers have already located in the county this spring and we have correspondence which indicates that a great many more will soon be here. Those who have settled this spring are well fixed. Many of them say they came because of our prohibition laws.

We have a list of three hundred families who are coming from various states to settle in this state and probably in this vicinity. Notwithstanding we had last year the boom of two railroads just completed to this city, the demand for real estate is as great now as it was then. Some large and fine buildings will be erected in this city this year. One business house in our charge by McDougal will cost $8,000. Money is plenty here for loaning and can be had at as low rates as in any of the western states.

ELI YOUNGHEIM,

Dealer in clothing, gents furnishing goods, hats, caps, and trunks. My business is better than a year ago. I do not think that prohibition has affected it. I expect an increase of business right along and have full confidence in the future of this county. I think there are more goods in my line in this city than there was a year ago.

W. E. TANSEY,

Police Judge: I came into this office on February 1st, just three months ago today. The saloons had closed the last week in January and the prohibition laws had just gone into practical effect here. During these three months, I have had before me two cases for drunkenness which occurred in my first week: one case for being found in a bawdy house, and 11 cases for quarreling, fighting, swearing, or carrying concealed weapons—14 cases in all. The records of this office show that in the same three months of last year there were 76 police cases, of which 29 were for drunkenness, 21 for being found in a bawdy house, and 16 for quarreling and fighting.

R. B. WAITE,

Real estate agent: Though there is quite a number of vacant rooms in the city, there are more occupied buildings now than there were a year ago. There were a great many new buildings erected during the past year.

H. L. WELLS, M. D.

There is no sickness here which belongs to the country, nothing but chronic diseases which have been brought here with the patients. Chronic cases of catarrh and kindred diseases yield readily to treatment here by the aid of atmospheric influences. This is not a malarial country. I shall take the physicians oath and abide by and support the prohibitory law. Rents are high here, too high. Six months rent at the rate I pay for the office I occupy would build one as good.

W. A. LEE,

Dealer in Agricultural implements and machinery. My trade is better than it was a year ago. I am selling more wagons, more cultivators, and more of almost every other kind of farm machinery. I am giving less credit than a year ago not that there are fewer men whom I would credit, for it is a fact that there are many more farmers whom I would credit than there were a year ago. Then there were many farmers who were in town frequently, drinking and idling around, seeming to care little for their farm work, who are now rarely seen in town; and when they do come, attend to their purchases and leave. And when I see them at home, they are busily putting in their seed and improving their farms. I could name a large number of farmers who have reformed wonderfully in this particular. I travel over our county frequently, and observe that an unusual amount of improvements are going on this spring.

GEO. BLACK, M. D.

My practice is not as good as it was last year because nobody is sick. It has really been healthy for the last two years. This is a healthy country. There is no malaria here and nothing to make it unhealthy. Cannot tell as yet what effect prohibition has or will have on the general health, but of course it will be favorable. I think I shall follow the advice of the Medical Association, which meets in Wichita soon, with regard to qualifying for and prescribing liquors for medicine.

S. C. SMITH,

City engineer. I have taken considerable pains to ascertain the situation of the sheep interest in this county. A year ago there were about 40,000 sheep in this county. Recently I got actual enumeration of 69,500 sheep in the county, and there were probably many that I did not get. The sheep are about two thirds graded merinos and one third native Colorado and Missouri. A large majority of the bucks are nearly full blood merinos called thorough breds. I think the wool crop of this county this spring will amount to 350,000 pounds and will net $70,000.

REV. J. E. PLATTER,

Pastor of the first Presbyterian church. My congregations average larger than they did a year ago. I note the presence of many whom I did not see in church a year ago. The attendance at the sabbath school is much greater than it was a year ago. The contributions of members of the congregation to pay the pastor and expenses are much larger and more readily paid and the finances of the church are in much better condition.

A. H. GREEN,

Real estate agent. I am selling more farms than I did a year ago. Almost all who buy pay entirely cash down. There are some vacant houses in this city, perhaps twenty five, but there have been built a great many more than that within a year. There are many more occupied houses in this city than there were a year ago.

D. A. MILLINGTON,

Postmaster: The Winfield post office is a post office of the second class. The revenues of this office for the last three months ending April 30th were $1,851. For the corresponding months of last year they were $1,830.

A. D. SPEED,

Liveryman. Our business is starting out very good this spring. During the hard, cold winter it was rather dull. A year ago our business was booming on account of the recent completion of two railroads to this place. Now it is not so good, but it is excellent nevertheless. Could not say that the prohibitory law has any effect on our business. There are four livery stocks in this city the same as a year ago.

M. L. READ,

President of the board of trustees of the M. E. Church. The congregations assembled for services at this church average a considerable larger than a year ago. The seats are generally pretty well filled. The seating capacity of the church is about six hundred. I observe that many persons attend church who did not attend a year ago. This church is a fine, large building, 40 x 80 feet of Cowley County building stone, and the audience room is the whole size with a gallery. The financial condition of the church is excellent and the subscriptions for expenses are better and larger than they were a year ago. Our sabbath school is in a flourishing condition. The average attendance is 160, which is greater than a year ago.

F. M. FRIEND,

Dealer in millinery stock, sewing machines, and organs. The business of this house is good, but not so good as a year ago. One man and three ladies are employed in this house and are kept very busy. The season is about a month later than last year and trade has hardly commenced. It is likely to exceed that of last spring in the outcome. There are four millinery stocks in town same as last year. The trade in sewing machines and organs is better than I had reason to expect. Do not see as the prohibitory law has affected our trade as yet, but think the effect will be to make better trade.

PHILO WINTER,

Farmer of Tisdale township. There is as much building going on in the county as ever, more trees are being planted than ever before, more corn is put in than ever before, more breaking going on, and more farm work generally being done. There is not an empty house to be had and the population is increasing.

HENDRICKS & WILSON,

General hardware, stoves, and tinware. Out trade is fully as good as it was a year ago. We expected a large falling off in trade on account of short crops last year. We account for the continued good trade by the arrival of men with money who are settling in the county. We get some of the money which was formerly spent for liquor.

SAM. WATT,

Farmer. There is more corn put in than ever before and the stand is excellent. Many of the farmers have been through their fields with the cultivator for the first time.

COL. SCOTT OF LOCKPORT, NEW YORK.

While on my way to Winfield, I heard it frequently reported that this city was going down, and my surprise when I arrived here was great to find the large amount of building and other improvements going on, and the lively trade that is being transacted. Winfield is the liveliest and most flourishing city of the size which I have seen in my travels this spring.

JOHNSTON & HILL,

Dealers in furniture. Our trade is better than it was a year ago, though we have more competition in the business than we had then. The tendency of the short crops of last summer to decrease the trade is fully made up by the tendency of those then in the habit of spending their money for liquor to now spend it for furniture and ornaments for their homes. We observe that there are fewer men on the streets and sidewalks nowadays than there were a year ago, and fewer men calling to examine and price our goods; but then men would lounge around awhile and leave without buying, while now they almost always buy something. We notice that many women who come in here have a more cheerful, happy look than they had a year ago. Our trade in coffins has fallen off.

BAILEY & RINKER, GROCERS.

Our trade is more than double what it was a year ago. We are carrying a larger and better stock than we did then. There are twelve grocery stores in town, the same number there were a year ago.

BROTHERTON & SILVER,

Seed store and agricultural implements. The seed trade is one-third better than it was a year ago. We have been paying less attention to the implement business than last year, and our trade is less. We are satisfied that prohibition is helping our trade considerably. Many are planting seeds who used to be loafing around, drinking more or less.

REV. JAMES CAIRNS,

Pastor of the first Baptist church. My congregation average larger than it did a year ago, and our finances are in better condition. We have the foundation laid for a new church, which will cost $10,000, which we expect to erect in due time.

T. R. BRYAN,

Trustee of the Christian church. The congregations at our church are larger than a year ago, and the church is in better financial condition. Our Sabbath school is better attended.

REV. DR. CANFIELD,

Pastor of the Protestant Episcopal church. This church had its beginning within a year. It is in a flourishing condition. We have no suitable place of worship yet, and our congregations are not as large as we would expect with a suitable room. They average about fifty. We think we shall be able to build a new church during this year.

BADEN & CO.,

General merchandise. Our trade is about the same as it was a year ago. Then we had a great amount of orders from men engaged in building the railroads, which we have not got now. Our trade in butter, eggs, chickens, etc., is immense. This city is shipping more of these kinds of produce than any other city in Kansas, and we will undertake to show it from our books if anyone doubts it. Most of our shipments are to Colorado and New Mexico. This is the best county in the West.

J. L. M. HILL, RESTAURANT.

Think the closing of the saloons has reduced my oyster business very largely. When a squad of men have got pretty full of liquor, it makes them feel so rich that they will buy oysters by the quantity. My cigar and fruit business is better and increasing. Men who drink liquor do not buy fruit as a general rule.

SCOVILL & CO.,

Clothing and gents furnishing goods. Our trade is larger than it was a year ago. The present outlook for trade is much better than it was last year at this time. I do not see that prohibition has affected my business in any way. It cannot be that it has hurt this town in the least, and the country will soon be richer and more populous for it.

W. B. PIXLEY,

General merchandise. I am a newcomer here just commencing to build up a business. My trade is better than I expected it would be. I think prohibition is affecting the trade, that many children are wearing shoes who never had any before and get more bread and meat to eat.

SMITH BROTHERS,

Dealers in boots and shoes. Our impression is that our trade is just about as large as it was a year ago. Then the farmers had wheat and corn kept over, which they were selling and had plenty of money; now their last year’s crop is exhausted. It is true that there are buildings for rent here now while a year ago it was difficult to get one, but rents are still about one-third higher than they ought to be. We have no means of knowing what effect prohibition has had upon our trade thus far. There are two more stocks of shoes and boots in town than there were a year ago.

W. J. HODGES,

Stock dealer. The acreage of corn planted this spring in this county is twenty to twenty-five percent greater than it was last year, and what is particularly noticeable, the work is better done. It has all come up and is looking splendidly. If nothing unusual happens to prevent, the crop will be one-third greater than ever before. My shipments of stock for the market are about the same as they were a year ago. In the last three months I have shipped: Fat hogs, 65 cars, 4,259 head, $48,813.33; fat sheep, 3,413 head, $15,944; fat cattle, 100 head, $4,500. Total amount paid, $69,307.33.

PROF. M. T. TRIMBLE,

Principal of the public schools of Winfield. The attendance and interest in the schools of this city are much greater than they were a year ago. For the last three months the enrollment of pupils was 402 and the average daily attendance was 386. The corresponding three months of last year the enrollment was 236 and average daily attendance 226.

SNYDER & SPOTSWOOD,

Produce dealers. Our business is much larger than it was a year ago. In the last two months we have shipped to Colorado and New Mexico 32,070 dozens of eggs and 6,761 pounds of butter, besides large quantities of dressed poultry. We are handling a large amount of fresh garden vegetables, and besides what we are able to buy we cultivate 12 acres in garden sauce. We raise a large amount of poultry and keep the best breeds.

M. HAHN & CO.,

Dealers in dry goods, carpets, clothing, and gents furnishing goods. Our trade is about the same it was a year ago. We had reason to expect it would be much less on account of the short crops. We do not know how to account for the continued good trade. Cannot tell what effect the prohibition law has upon it.

HENRY GOLDSMITH,

Dealer in books and stationary and news dealer. My business is generally better than it was last year, but I had reason from the short crops to expect a large decrease of trade. I sell more books, and more from my soda fountain. It is certainly too soon to make an estimate of the effect of prohibition upon my trade. Can tell better a year from now.

I. LEVI,

Dealer in clothing and gents furnishing goods. My trade is fully as good as it was a year ago though I had reason to expect a considerable falling off on account of the short crops. It is too early to estimate the effect of prohibition upon my trade. If we have plenty of rains this year as we now expect, the trade will be much better than it is now.

S. H. MYTON,

Dealer in general hardware, stoves, tinware, agricultural implements, and machinery. My trade during this month of April has not been materially different in the aggregate from that of April of last year. In planters, cultivators, and other tools for corn raising, my trade is better than ever before. Last year the season was about a month earlier than this year and now our heaviest trade has hardly commenced. It now appears that the aggregate of the spring trade will be better than it was last year. I apprehended a very much smaller cash trade than a year ago, because of the short crops last year. I did not expect there was anywhere near as much money in the country as there seems to be. I cannot tell yet whether the prohibitory law has the effect to increase my trade. Last year when it became evident that the wheat crop would be short, the sales began to fall off and profits to grow less, which continued until

recently.

J. A. EARNEST, GROCER.

My trade is better than it was a year ago. There are 12 grocery stocks in town, the same as a year ago. Had the crops been average crops last year, my trade would have been much larger. A year ago many merchants wanted to get out of business. There does not appear to be any such sentiment now. I do not know what effect the prohibition law has upon trade. I do not see as many men loafing around as formerly, and I presume much of the money formerly spent for liquor now goes for groceries and other goods.

WALLIS & WALLIS, GROCERS.

Our business is hardly as good as it was a year ago. There are more groceries in town than a year ago, and the aggregate trade of the place in groceries is as large as then. We have just commenced a new building for our business to be of our Winfield stone, brick front, iron columns, 14 foot ceiling, 25 x 105 ft. with basement. We need more and better room for our business.

HUDSON BROTHERS, JEWELERS.

We are doing twice the amount of business we did a year ago, probably because we are carrying twice as many goods and are better known. Do not know as the short crops of last year has any effect on our trade. Have not noticed any particular effect of the prohibitory laws on our trade.

HORNING, ROBINSON & CO.,

Hardware. Business larger than a year ago. It would doubtless be much larger had we full crops last year, but the prohibition law affects us favorably. Men who used to spend their money for liquor now buy a great many things in our line which they have heretofore done without. Our stock is much heavier than it was a year ago, and we expect a much larger trade than we have ever had before.

HON. C. R. MITCHELL,

Member of the State legislature. I live in Arkansas City, Cowley County, Kansas. The prohibition laws went into effect at that place on the first of February, three months ago. No one has left on account of it except the saloon keepers, but a great many have settled there, the population and business is increasing rapidly, and the city is on a boom.

RAY, JOHNSON & CO.,

Carpenters and builders. We have more work on hand in the way of building than we had last year notwithstanding the short crops of last summer. We think the amount of building going on is greater for the operation of the prohibitory law. Our workmen get along without liquor, are sober, and industrious; and most of them are settled in homes with their families. We think that within six months, we shall have large accessions of newcomers with capital who are coming here because of the prohibitory law, and will have many more good building contracts to offer. The tramp carpenters are steering clear of this place and that makes work for the resident carpenters steady and valuable.

AXTELL & CO., RESTAURANT.

Business in this line is about as good as it was a year ago, less country and more town trade. Don’t think prohibition will make our business any less.

PRYOR & KINNE,

Real estate and loan agents. The demand for farms and the prices of real estate are about the same in this county as they were a year ago. There are many newcomers who appear to be men of standing and of more wealth than those who came last year. They do not hesitate to buy on account of prohibition, but express gratification on account of it. We believe prohibition is going to be a great benefit to our county by inducing the better class of people to settle here.

E. M. REYNOLDS & BRO.,

Well drillers. The demand for our work is about the same as it was a year ago. We drill wells in all parts of the county and travel all over the county frequently. I observe that the amount of building and other improvements going on in the county now is full as much as a year ago. I see full as many and I think more newcomers settling in this county than there were a year ago.

Those settling this spring are a good class of citizens having money, intelligence, and energy. Many of them have told us that they came to this state because they wanted to raise their children where they would not be contaminated by the influences of the liquor traffic. The promise for large crops the coming year is excellent and the farmers are in the best of spirits.

LYNN & LOOSE,

General merchandise. Our business is about the same as it was last year. We had reason to apprehend it would be less on account of the bad season last year. Cannot explain why business has kept up so well. Produce is bringing a better price, though there is much less of it, a considerable stock is being handled, and a considerable amount of eggs, butter, etc., is being sold. We do not observe that the prohibitory law has affected our business in any way. There are less people on the streets than a year ago, but more and better buyers in proportion to the crowd than last year. It is rather wonderful how our trade keeps up under the circumstances. As partly accounting for it, we have more goods, a larger, better, and more convenient room, and better facilities for showing goods. Our sale room is 25 x 140, well filled with goods, with basement same size for storage, a large carpet room in the second story, and an elevator from the basement to the second story. French plate glass front and lighted with gas throughout.

WINFIELD BANK.

The business deposits in the bank are much better and larger in volume than ever before. We do not think the increase of the volume of business of the city is much over that of a year ago, but we attribute a considerable portion of the increase of our deposits to newcomers who have settled in this vicinity bringing with them large sums of money to invest. Many of these have told us that they would not have settled in Kansas but for the prohibition laws. This law is favorable to banks because it raises the value of names as securities. A man who is good for $1,000 now, is likely to be better a year from now, while formerly many such would be likely to be depreciated as sureties by liquor. All Kansas banks will stand better with their eastern correspondents because their home securities will be more valuable.

READ’S BANK.

Our deposit business is better than it ever was before, which indicates that the general business of the city is larger than it was last year. The business of Winfield is in a healthier condition than it has ever been. The natural effect of the failure of crops last year would have been to reduce the present volume of business more than twenty-five percent, but the prohibitory laws or something else has neutralized this effect. We are anticipating a business boom as soon as the harvest is over.

HON. W. P. HACKNEY,

State Senator. The prohibitory law has been in force here for three months and works to a charm. There is very little drinking apparent in the community and I am convinced that the law will be a success. I have changed my opinion on the matter, which was formerly adverse to the practicability of such a law. Our county will be wealthier, more populous, and a better place to live because of this law.

A. T. SPOTSWOOD & CO.,

Grocers. Our business is nearly double what it was a year ago. We have a magnificent stock, much better than it was a year ago. If prohibition has had any effect on our business, it has been to increase it.

REV. L. F. LAVERTY,

Pastor of the M. E. church, Arkansas City, Cowley County, Kansas. A year ago there were many vacant buildings in Arkansas City; many buildings have been erected since, but there are no vacant buildings there today. Our city marshal has now apparently nothing to do and it is probable that the office will be dispensed with. Prohibition went into practical operation there three months ago, and I think it will be strictly enforced.

C. A. BLISS,

of Bliss & Wood, Winfield City Mills. This mill is a large, substantial structure on the Walnut river at Winfield, built of stone. The fall of water is eight feet, and there is plenty of power except at rare seasons, when we use steam power, having a 100 horsepower engine. We can make 24,000 pounds of flour a day, doing more than we did a year ago. I think there is plenty of wheat in the county to keep the mills going until another crop is brought in. Prices are about the same as a year ago. We ship most of our flour to Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas. We can ship three carloads a week besides supply our home demand, which is considerably larger than it was last year. I do not know of anyone leaving here on account of the prohibitory law, except two saloon men. I know of many who are arriving and settling here, who express themselves gratified with prohibition. These are generally substantial men of means. One whom I recently met, William P. Yates, brings great wealth and appears a very intelligent gentleman. I think we are much better off for prohibition.

Winfield Courier, May 12, 1881.

The following cases have been disposed of by the court up to date.

Kelly vs. Manny, change of venue.

Winfield Courier, May 19, 1881.

The "antiquated" brewer of Winfield is "on his ear," and is trying to revenge himself on the good people of the city of Winfield and Cowley County, because they will not buy his beer and barley. . . .

It was to be expected that Cowley County would be the order of attack, and falsification (for lying is the stock in trade of rum and the devil, those barbaric twins). This county was the banner county of the state on prohibition last November. It cast 3,243 votes for and 870 against the amendment and of course stands the impersonation of the greatest sinner against King Alcohol. But the Winfield COURIER of May 5th, comes to our office with statements of the leading businessmen of Winfield, and leading citizens of Cowley County, concerning the status of business there, which show that they are not only holding their own, but progressing finely, notwithstanding Mr. Manny’s assertions. We counted in the COURIER of May 5th, sixty-six distinct statements in considerable detail of so many business houses, professions, trades, and occupations, as to their own business prosperity, thirty-nine of whom state that their business is better than it was a year ago—a period with which Mr. Manny makes his comparison. Several of these report business much better, some of them double. Eight state that their business is about the same, five report theirs not as good. Three of these last are druggists, one a physician, and the fifth the police judge. Two of the druggists and the physician attribute the falling off in their trade to the excellent health of the city and county, and one druggist charges his diminished receipts to the prohibitory law, and says he will "go west" where he can do business with some "degree of freedom."—sell, we suppose, whiskey under the guise of medicine, a la Hostetter Bitters, Ginger Bitters, etc. . . . .

But we must close this article already too long. Cowley is a great county and Winfield is a thriving city, and they are inhabited by a grand people. One reason for introducing so much local history in a paper of general circulation, is that Cowley is a representative county in point of natural resources and material wealth—but especially representative as a temperance county, and every slander uttered against her because of her grand temperance record, is aimed at the great principle of prohibition, and to put her right on the record is simply to place temperance in its true light. Kansas Methodist.

Winfield Courier, May 19, 1881.

WINFIELD, KAS., May 16, 1881.

It has been the custom for some time among a certain class of newspapers to take every opportunity of assaulting and vilifying the drug trade. Your paper has been no exception to the rest.

These assaults have generally been borne with silence, if not patience. Your editorial of May 12, contains a direct attack upon the course adopted by myself and the great majority of druggists in Kansas in regard to the new prohibitory laws. I should be false to myself as a man, and false to the reputation of the honorable business I follow, if I allowed this last article with its gross misstatements to pass unanswered.

Your assertion that our State Association is controlled by men who have been selling liquor as a beverage, under pretense of medical purposes, is untrue. Our president, Mr. R. J. Brown, of Leavenworth, bears as good a character as a Christian gentleman and temperance man as any man in Kansas, and the other officers and the members of the executive committee stand at the head of the profession in their respective localities. Our meeting at Topeka was held with open doors, and the proceedings were published in every paper in the State which chose to print them. I challenge you to find one sentence in the resolutions, or address of our president, recommending any violation of law. On the contrary, a strict compliance with the law was urged, and the recommendation to abstain from taking out permits was limited to the time necessary to make plain our status under the law by decisions in the courts.

I do not find in the law any requirement to take out a permit and sell whiskey. I find that a druggist may take out a permit if he chooses, but nothing compelling him to do so. To my mind, the druggist who takes out the permit and goes through the humiliating process necessary to obtain one, is the man who makes acknowledgment that it is impossible for him to live without the liquor trade, and not the man who refuses to sell at all. And I would most respectfully suggest that the place for you to look for violations of the law is not among those who are out of the liquor trade entirely, but among those who are furnishing it to the people by permits and prescriptions.

In conclusion, I will say that I have memoranda of at least one open violation of the law since May 1st, which is at the service of either yourself or the temperance committee if you have sand enough to engage in a prosecution which might make the law odious.

Very respectfully yours, QUINCY A. GLASS.

When Mr. Glass asserts that this paper has taken "every opportunity of assaulting and vilifying the drug trade," he states what he and everyone of our readers knows to be false. To oppose legitimate drug trade would be puerile. It is true we have condemned the sale of intoxicating liquors as a beverage, whether by druggists or others. We have convictions in regard to this matter that we have spoken freely and which we expect to continue to express. In our doing so, we have not supposed that we were interfering in any manner with the trade of any honorable druggist. We have always supposed that Mr. Glass was doing a straight and legitimate business and are scarcely able to account for his sensitiveness in regard to this matter.

We have nothing to take back of what we said concerning the men who control the druggists’ association of the State. The statement of Mr. Glass in regard to R. J. Brown, of Leavenworth, and the other officers of the association, is not conclusive evidence. We read the papers published at the homes of some of these men, and we have not forgotten the items they contained in regard to "long rows of well-filled jugs" sold for a day or two previous to the first of the present month.

Mr. Glass pretends to know of someone who since its taking effect has violated some provision of the prohibition law. If so, why does he not like a good citizen walk up to the County Attorney’s office and give him the facts? That is the manly course for him to pursue. Others may hesitate to act until they know what they can prove. If he knows that the law has been violated, let him state the facts. He will soon discover that the friends of temperance have the "sand" to see the law enforced.

Winfield Courier, June 16, 1881.

WINFIELD, June 12, 1881.

Some days ago the Telegram published a remarkable article on the new temperance law, and one is forced to the conclusion that the gushing temperance advocate of last fall’s campaign is about to go back on his record and join the red nosed, bleary eyed. And some visaged rabble who are just now holding up their hands in holy honor at that law which forbids the sale of intoxicants for sacramental purposes; is it possible that a chance to rent the basement of his new hotel at a big price for a Beer and Billiard saloon is working on his judgment?

And that reminds me that it is one of the stereotyped assertions now almost universally indulged in by men opposed to temperance legislation "that if a vote was again taken on the constitutional amendment, it would be defeated," and some men who voted for it now say they would not. The latter class no more can afford an answer, there can be but one answer and that is they were opposed to the principal at heart and voted for it because they were too low and cowardly to stand up like men and proclaim their convictions in the face of popular clamor.

That man who finds fault with the law and at the same time asserts that he is in favor of temperance, either has not examined the law, or he is an infamous liar. To have honestly voted for the amendment and be in opposition to the law is impossible; the law is the amendment, nothing more and nothing less.

And when men prate about the law being too strong, they proclaim their knavery or else the want of sense. The people legally adopted the amendment; the Legislature in obedience to that will passed the law, and it is the duty of all good men to stand up for its enforcement, and the county officials should zealously search out, arrest, try, and convict every malefactor.

The legislature, in passing this law, has placed the question of its enforcement in the honor of the people, and they have elected officers whose duty it is to hunt up violators and bring them to justice.

And this reminds me that your correspondent has been informed that with the exception of your city marshal, John Burris, no officer has informed our county attorney of any violations. And yet, Burris, I am informed, voted against the amendment, but does his duty as an officer while Shenneman and the other officers all voted for it and file no complaints. How is it that Mr. Shenneman finds criminals in every state in the Union, but can’t find any violations of this law with Frank Manny selling beer day in and day out and openly at that, and everybody knows it.

It is time that the people call a halt and give every officer who fails to find violations of their law a rest. This law means something, and the sooner our officials wake up to the fact the better, and those who are awake to it ought to be supported, and those who are not ought to be bounced.

I have been a supporter of our sheriff, but I will not be again unless he can catch whiskey outlaws as well as horse thieves when rewards are paid. It will be in order now for some idiot to yell, "Why don’t you inform the officers?" To which I reply in advance, "I have, with the people, elected officers to do such work and they must do it." And that officer who shines that he knows of no violations lies or has shut his eyes on purpose to avoid seeing. This temperance fight is not over; it has not commenced as it were. It will not stop now, but will go on until the object is accomplished, or Kansas goes back to her rum holes. OBSERVER.

Winfield Courier, June 23, 1881.

Frank Manny has stopped the COURIER; not the whole edition exactly, but the one copy, and will urge his friends to stop it too. He says he does not care to longer pay for the dissemination of doctrines so damaging to his business interests. The position seems to be sound, and we accept it without a murmur. We shall continue to urge the strict enforcement of the prohibitory laws all the same, though we lose a thousand subscribers thereby. The law must be enforced, even though those who resist should be crushed. The bull that bucked the railroad train was brave enough, but confound his judgment.

Winfield Courier, June 23, 1881.

Mr. Frank Manny was arrested and brought before Justice Kelly Tuesday evening charged with selling beer in violation of the law. It will doubtless take several days to try this case, and we express no opinion as to the truth of the charge, desiring to avoid prejudicing the case in any way. We have no ill will against Mr. Manny, but we hold that the law must be enforced and whoever violates it should suffer the penalty. We do not apprehend that jurymen here will perjure themselves to screen a man who is proved guilty. If any such should appear, we shall give his case due publicity.

Winfield Courier, June 30, 1881.

The Manny trial is putting the attorneys on their metal and will show the quality of their temper.

It was dangerous to attend court Monday. The moment a new face appeared in the doorway, Sheriff Shenneman would call out: "Take the jury box, please."

Winfield Courier, June 30, 1881.

When the list of witnesses for the State in the Manny trial was called, one of the attorneys for the defense promptly answered, "Present!"

Winfield Courier, June 30, 1881.

Judge Campbell and Attorney Jennings "locked horns" several times during the Manny trial. It is needless to remark that the County Attorney came out ahead.

Winfield Courier, June 30, 1881.

The "volunteer counsel" assisting the state in the Manny trial made, or attempted to make, an argument Wednesday morning. His first sentence contained a broad and unmistakable inference that the gentleman preceding him had lied. The air for a few moments was blue, and as the Attorney so attacked came forward and asserted that the "volunteer counsel" was "a contemptible little puppy and his implications not worthy of notice," ye reporter slid under the table. The efforts of the Sheriff and court finally quelled the storm, and peace and quiet was once more restored.

Winfield Courier, June 30, 1881.

He came, he saw, and he dropped $35 with the police and justice courts. He was a verdant citizen from the sandy suburbs of Arkansas City, and although he found at the "Hub" that prohibition didn’t entirely prohibit, still it made fun more costly than of old. He returned a sadder, and we hope a wiser man, but still a little drunk. His name was Albert Horn.

Winfield Courier, June 30, 1881.

Winfield has been in a fever of excitement for the past few days over the arrest of Frank Manny for violating the prohibition amendment in selling beer. The trial was first brought before Justice Kelly, but the defense secured a change of venue to Justice Tansey’s court. Monday was the day set for the trial and early in the day numbers of spectators gathered to see the opening of the case.

The array of legal talent retained on the part of the defense was simply appalling: Judge Campbell, with eight years’ experience on the bench; J. E. Allen, one of the most precise and painstaking lawyers at the bar; O. M. Seward, the leading temperance attorney of the southwest; and Messrs. Soward & Asp, gentlemen of high standing at the bar. Certainly Mr. Manny should feel that his interests will be protected as far as the law is concerned.

County Attorney Jennings appeared for the State.

The hall opened at 9 o’clock, the jury was called, and the examination for jurors commenced. This proved to be a tedious matter as most everyone called had either formed or expressed an opinion, or had conscientious scruples that unfitted him for sitting in the case. Generally when a juror went into the box thinking he was unprejudiced, he found that he was mistaken before the lawyers got through with him. Up to noon thirty-five jurors had been called and twenty-nine of them proved to be incompetent.

After dinner the examination of jurors was continued and soon developed into a lively fight. The question was raised of whether a member of a temperance organization was a competent juror in the case, on which Judge Campbell made an exhaustive argument, insisting that such a person was not and could not be competent to sit in the case. County Attorney Jennings replied in a brief but convincing manner. He stated that if Judge Campbell’s theory was correct, a horse thief could be tried only by persons not opposed to horse stealing, and that persons who were in favor of enforcing the laws would not be competent jurors in criminal cases.

The court sustained the County Attorney, and the juror was passed. The jury was finally empanelled at 5 o’clock Monday evening.

The following is a list of the jurors: A. G. Wilson, James Bethel, E. P. Harlen, Elam Harter, I. N. Holmes, E. P. Kinne, J. H. Mounts, T. H. Jackson, T. S. Smith, Wm. Trezise, W. L. Morehouse, and W. I. Shotwell.

TUESDAY.

The court met Tuesday morning and upon calling the jury, it was found that Mr. T. W. Jackson, of Vernon township, was absent. An attachment was issued by the court and the sheriff started for Mr. Jackson’s home. The court then adjourned until one o’clock. About two o’clock the sheriff arrived with Mr. Jackson, who was quite ill, and asked to be discharged. The court ruled that he must serve unless positively unable.

The case was then opened by a statement from the County Attorney. Judge Campbell then arose on a "question of privilege" and asked the court to rule that the state use but three witnesses for the proving of any one fact. After much discussion the court overruled the request. The defense then moved that the case be dismissed, alleging that the information did not state facts sufficient to warrant any action. After another lengthy argument, the court promptly overruled the motion.

County Attorney Jennings then attempted to open the case, when the defense again objected and moved that the case be dismissed because "the complaint was not sworn to by a responsible party." Judge Campbell then made an exhaustive argument on a constitutional point. Mr. Jennings answered Judge Campbell at considerable length, and was followed by Mr. Asp for the defense, who closed the argument. The objection was overruled and duly excepted to, and the state proceeded with the examination of the first witness, Mr. Miller.

Mr. Miller testified that he resided in Winfield, and that he knew where Mr. Manny’s brewery was. He was asked if he had been in Mr. Manny’s brewery between the first day of May and the 21st day of June, the latter being the date the indictment was made. The defense objected on the ground that the state should confine its proof of offense to the date mentioned in the indictment: the 12th day of June. On this objection Mr. Allen spoke, and cited authorities, though none of our Supreme court. The State replied with Kansas authorities bearing directly upon the point. Mr. Asp closed the argument on this point, and the court overruled the objection.

MILLER LAUGHED!

The witness was allowed to answer the question; but instead of doing so, he laughed. The mouths of the audience cracked assunder, and his Honor got down under the counter to hold his sides. Witness then affirmatively answered the question. He also stated that he had drank something on Manny’s premises between those dates. The State asked in what buiding the drink was obtained. Before this question was answered, Judge Campbell requested his honor to instruct the witness that he was at liberty to refuse to answer any question that would tend to criminate himself. This request raised argument and the court adjourned to meet Wednesday morning, when the question will be discussed.

Court convened promptly at 6 o’clock and Judge Soward opened the argument. Numerous authorities were cited, among which were the celebrated Burr and Morgan cases. County Attorney Jennings replied in an extended argument, citing a large number of authorities.

At noon, Wednesday, we go to press. As yet the case has not been fairly opened, the defense bringing up point after point for the decision of the court. Each point must be argued exhaustively, which takes time and how long no one can tell. The case will be fought step by step. The council for defense will leave no stone unturned, and Attorney Jennings, although bearing up under a terrible pressure, will melt them at every turn. Our reporter will attend the trial throughout and a complete record of the proceedings will appear in our next issue.

Winfield Courier, July 7, 1881.

On Tuesday last the jurors in the case of the state against Frank Manny, for selling intoxicating drink in violation of law, having been out fifteen hours and failing to agree, were discharged by the court, and a new trial of the case was set for Monday, July 18th.

As the case is still pending, we shall yet be chary with our comments, but may with propriety say that so long as the defense was a denial of such sales, the defendant was entitled to patient hearing of his defense, and all the advantages which the law will give any one accused, but when the defense assumes the position that the law ought to be treated with contempt. because of its alleged atrocity, it amounts to a confession that the law has been violated. It seemed that the defense did not rely much upon the facts of the case, but upon the skill of the attorneys in inventing, and urging, various kinds of motions, objections, and dodges, by which they might obtain a ruling which would keep out evidence.

Such objections, one after another, were sprung upon the prosecuting attorney and the court, with such bewildering persistency and energy, that it was hardly possible, among the multiplicity of correct rulings by the court, that they should not have extorted one bad ruling which would nearly accomplish their purpose.

We think the jurors should not have been discharged so soon, by at least three days, unless they agreed.

Justice Tansey evidently intended to make correct rulings in every instance, was honestly trying to support the law; but with such an overpowering array of legal talent, headed by the man whose opinion has been taken here for law for eight years, it is credited to him that his rulings were nearly all eminently correct. As we cannot speak near so favorably of some of the witnesses, and some of the jurors, we conclude by saying that it is the general verdict that the county attorney did himself proud.

Winfield Courier, July 7, 1881.

MILLINGTON THEN HAS ANOTHER LONG EDITORIAL ABOUT "TRIAL BY JURY" AND VENTS HIS WRATH ABOUT THE PRESENT SYSTEM..."The jury system as existing under our laws and descended to us from a semi-barbarous age of castes, may now be called an institution by which law breakers may escape conviction and punishment."

Winfield Courier, July 7, 1881.

THE EVIDENCE IN BRIEF.

Mr. Miller was then asked what he had drank at Manny’s. He stated that he had called for "ginger" and that he probably got what he called for. That it was about the color of barn-yard drainage, that he had bought a quart, and had paid twenty cents for it, that he had never become intoxicated on it, and had never drank more than two glasses at a time. He was then asked when he had heard that "ginger" was being sold there.

The defense objected, but the objection was overruled. The witness then said that it was about the middle of May. He stated that he had never seen anyone become intoxicated on this drink. That he lived several hundred feet from the brewery; that it had about the same effect as lemonade.

Mr. Jochems was then called. He had been at Manny’s brewery twice since the first of May. The defense then objected on the ground that the prosecution should confine itself to the sale already proven and the point was ably argued by Mr. Asp. Mr. Troup assisting the state, spoke for ten minutes, and Mr. Asp closed the argument. The objection was sustained and the court held the prosecution to the sale proven to Miller and allowed to introduce testimony to prove the drink known as "ginger" was intoxicating, providing no date or other sale than the one made to Miller was fixed by date. Mr. Jochems then testified that he had drank "ginger" and that it produced no effect on him.

LEVI GAINS

was then called. He testified that he had been to Manny’s with a friend; that the friend had bought "ginger" and they both drank it. That he thought it was intoxicating; that it had effected him and had considerably intoxicated his friend; that it looked like beer.

H. DEWEY.

Mr. Dewey stated that he had drank "ginger" at Manny’s; that it had no effect on him; that he noticed symptoms of intoxication upon the friend who went with him; that the friend had a half pint bottle of liquid; that he procured a bottle at the brewery.

JOHN GIBSON

swore that he had been at Manny’s brewery and had drank "ginger" there. Only one glass because he was afraid it would make him tight. Looked like beer; didn’t taste like beer; saw another party intoxicated.

W. W. SMITH

Testified that he had drank "ginger" at Manny’s which looked like beer, but had not much foam, and made him tight. Was there several times, first at about nine o’clock, was not intoxicated when first went, was not intoxicated much at any time.

Cross examination: Drank ginger. Had drank nothing else that day but a dose of medicine put up by Dr. Cole for flat bottle. I took two swallows during the day; kept it in my side pocket. Did not give it to anyone during the day; offered to trade my watch for a pony, and do not think I offered any man a drink from bottle. Had bottle of "ginger" which I got from Manny and man drank from. Was not positive was at brewery three times. Think two of us drank quart or half gallon, went to brewery second time. Did not know whether he got dinner or not. Stayed at brewery longer third time than first times. Think drank more than at other times. Was intoxicated that day. Got in that condition about nine o’clock, and do not think can recall all that happened. Others afterward recalled things that I had said and done that I knew nothing of. Felt next day all used up and knew I had been drunk. Was arrested that day for being drunk. Had trial before Justice Kelly. Has no interest in case. Has been offered no consideration to testify in case. Got medicine from Dr. Fleming instead of Dr. Cole. Is in the habit of drinking intoxicating liquor to some extent. Had no other bottle except medicine and bottle of "ginger" and drank nothing but "ginger that day."

LOUIE ZENOR

was then called. The defense then introduced the objection that the prosecution had introduced all the witnesses necessary to prove the character of the liquor known as "ginger." This objection was made on Tuesday and overruled by the court. The court again overruled the objection. The witness stated that he was familiar with the location of Manny’s brewery, that it was located on the east side of section 21, township 42, range 4.

Cross examination: Was not surveyed; had never found corners. Did not know whether brewery was in frame or stone building. Was familiar with records of county; had seen in register’s office. Had examined records in relation to this particular tract.

CHARLEY HODGES

had obtained from Mr. Manny a drink known as "ginger." Color dark red, darker than beer. Did not know whether it was intoxicating or not. Had no effect upon him. Had drank three or four glasses at once. Had drank beer but had no effect on him. Did not know whether "ginger" was fermented liquor or not. Did not know what fermented liquor was. Had foam like beer. Went out to brewery because wanted something to drink. "Ginger" was not a common drink.

Cross examination: Had foam something like cider or soda water.

W. A. SMITH

had been to Manny’s. Thinks it was near the Walnut. Had drank "ginger." Was a kind of "maroon" color. Darker than beer. Did not know whether it was fermented or not. Had no effect on his system. As compared with water for quenching, its effect was about the same. May have stimulated to a slight extent. Had taken two or three glasses at once. There was quite a number there with him. Has never seen anyone in or about Manny’s brewery intoxicated since the 1st of May.

A. D. SPEED

has obtained "ginger" at Manny’s. Was a pleasant drink. Dark color. Had color of beer. Don’t know whether it was fermented or not. Never drank enough to know whether it was intoxicating or not. Had drank two glasses at once. Did not think he could drink enough to intoxicate him.

WILBER DEVER

was called and stated that he had been at Manny’s, had obtained "ginger" from him. Pretty fair drink. Looks some like lager or Peruvian beer. Does not taste like beer. Does not know whether it was intoxicating or not. Had drank two or three glasses. Had never seen anyone intoxicated in or about Manny’s.

GEORGE REMBAUGH

had been to Manny’s. Had drank "ginger" there. Look some like Peruvian beer. Had foam on it. Did not know whether it was intoxicating or not. Had seen persons under the influence of something in and about Manny’s.

Cross examination: Though Peruvian beer was slightly fermented to make it sparkle and foam. Re-examined by the state. Had about same effect as a glass of ice-water.

The state here rested its case. The defense also rested without introducing a witness.