Barber County Kansas
|
Barber County Kansas |
|
23 April 1885:
For the benefit of the parties who worked up the cattle stealing business and brought the thieves to justice, we wish to say that Mr. Chitwood informed Jno. Andrews and Charley Nelson of the fact that Ben Keyes was doing the work of stealing and rebranding, and he thought he (Chitwood) could trap them, but later Norman Young came down and told the parties that Chitwood was suspected by Ben and he could not work it. In view of these facts, Mr. Andrews and Charley Nelson advised Young to assist Chitwood, which he did, resulting in the capture of Keyes in the act of branding the steers. No detective was sent from Dodge, as stated in the Union last week, neither was any syndicate or body of cow men concerned in the pursuit or capture of the thieves, all being the work of Nelson and Andrews, supported by Chitwood and Young. -- Kansas Prairie Dog, 23 April 1885.
16 April 1885:
The way of the cow thief is hard, and is full of six-shooters and sheriffs.Chitwood deserves great credit for the manner in which he worked up the cattle thieving case.
Cattle Thieves arrested - bound over to court
For some time Jno. Andrews and others have suspected that they were losing cattle, and a close watch was kept for the thieves. On the 12th of the present month Mr. Chitwood brought the news here that a band of cattle thieves were at work on Elm Creek, and had made him a proposition to join the gang and steal cattle belong to Jno. Andrews. Mr. Andrews told Chitwood to go ahead steal the cattle and bring word in when they would brand and he would attend to the rest of the program. Chitwood done as ordered and reported that on the 13th the branding irons would be applied to cattle belonging to Andrews. Charley Nelson went to the Lodge and notified Doc Rigg, when they rode to Elm Creek and found Mr. Andrews, Ed. Buck, Jas. Andrews, Geo. Hendrickson and Riley Lake in waiting. Ed. Buck delivered a warrant to Doc. Rigg demanding the arrest of Ben Keyes. The posse rode towards the place designated by Chitwood and found Ben in the act of holding a steer while Chitwood and another party, who is one of the persons called to assist Chitwood in his detective business, preparing to brand the steer. 9 head were found there, the property of a Kansas City man, 3 of which were branded. Andrew's brand is the mule shoe brand, and Keyes was branding over it with a link bar brand. The prisoner was brought before Esquire Nurse; Ed. Sample appearing for the defendant and B.W. Lemert for prosecution. After the evidence, which was in accordance with above statement, he was bound over in the sum of $1,560 for his appearance at court. Excitement ran high among the cow men, and had this occurred 5 or 6 years ago, Ben Keyes would have looked up a limb. -- Kansas Prairie Dog, 16 April 1885.
30 April 1885:
For double distilled adamantine boiled down to gall, Ben Keyes takes the entire bakery. While at the Lodge in the hands of the Sheriff, charged with cattle stealing, a bystander asked him how his cattle were doing, "I have only lost twelve, and some infernal hound stole two of them," replied Keyes. -- Kansas Prairie Dog, 30 April 1885.
4 June 1885:
G.W. Chitwood brought suit against Squire Andrews for services rendered in the recent arrest and conviction of Ben Keyes. The suit came up before Squire McCanlass, of Medicine Lodge, last Saturday, and a verdict rendered in favor of plaintiff, the case was appealed to the district court. It appears that there was some misunderstanding in regard to the payment of Chitwood. He claims $150 is due him while his employers say they only agreed to pay his expenses, which they have done and other numerous bills. -- Kansas Prairie Dog, 4 June 1885.
16 July 1885:
State of Kansas vs. Ben Keyes
This case of which every cattleman in the county is familiar, and one that is of interest to the cattlemen and has been a theme of general comment on the part of Keyes since his apprehension and arrest, was acquitted Tuesday. The particulars of the case are as follows: Last March G.W. Chitwood informed Jno. Andrews and Chas Nelson, of this city, that Ben Keyes was engaged in stealing and re-branding cattle and he thought that he (Chitwood) could accomplish the arrest of Keyes, in this, however, Chitwood was suspected by Ben, and he was advised to call to his assistance Norman Young, who notified the authorities when Keyes would rebrand the stolen cattle. According to the information a party consisting of Sheriff Rigg, C.D. Nelson, G.W. Hendrickson, Riley Lake, Ed. Buck, J.E. Andrews and J. Andrews went to the locality designated by Chitwood and Young and found Keyes in company with Chitwood and Young, in the act of branding the steers. Keyes was arrested and brought to this city and given a preliminary trial, resulting in Keyes giving a $15,000 bond for appearance at court. The manner in which this case was conducted reflects no credit on a Barber county court. It seems that Judge Ray was called from the bench just as this case came up for trial and F.E. Gillet, of Kingman, counsel for defendant, was elected judge pro tem. This fact alone looks as though there was some understanding between Judge Ray and the counsel for defendant. We are informed that Keyes, before the trial came to a close, made public his intention to bring suit against Mr. Andrews for malicious prosecution, which is evidence of the contemplated result of the trial. We think we but express the sentiments of the people of Barber county when we say the proceedings of the trial from beginning to end was a concocted scheme to clear Keyes. The evidence of Chas. Sparks and Abe Rush, witnesses for defense, went to show that Keyes had on the day of his arrest went to Sparks and told him what he was going to do, that he (Keyes) and Norman Young had fixed up a plot in which to catch Chitwood, and that everything was all right, and the cattle were to be branded that evening, then Keyes was going to report to the property authority, C.D. Nelson, constable of Lake City township, to effect the arrest of Chitwood the next morning. Young, who it will be seen, was instrumental in causing the arrest of Keyes, was allowed to leave the country, whose evidence perhaps would have been of more value in this case than any witness upon the stand. While the results of this case have a tendency to invite mob law in the county, it would only have the effect to protect her citizens from the thieves that have been plying their nefarious practice in this county for the past five years, yet, they are all detectives (?) -- Kansas Prairie Dog, 16 July 1885.
30 July 1885:
Week before last in an article regarding the Keyes case we stated that Hon. F.E. Gillet was retained as counsel for the defense, since that time we have received a letter from Mr. Gillet denying the statement. It is not the intention of the writer to personally attack an innocent man or men, our statement was made from the general belief of the parties interested in the case. While it is possible that our informants were mistaken we have made inquiry concerning the case and find that no proof will show that Gillett was retained in the case, however the impression prevails among the parties having direct knowledge of the case both at Medicine Lodge and at this place lacked the proper effort to convict the guilty parties. While no wheel should have been left unturned to bring the guilty to justice, it seems the main witness for the prosecution was secreted in the country, and who has since turned up. The general supposition as far as we can learn is to the effect that Young was hired to keep out of the way, and which he succeeded in doing. While the case has cost the county considerable expense as well as individuals, it will be seen that dissatisfaction will follow such neglect on the part of the court in allowing criminals to go unpunished and unheeded, defying the laws of the state. People will loose all confidence in her courts, criminals will be encouraged to continue on in their thieving practices and murder until mob law sill be compelled to take the place of the courts. It is being noised over the district that Judge Ray has in other instances shrunk from his official duty whenever an important issue was at stake. We need a judge in the Nineteenth District that will exercise his official capacity in a fearless and impartial manner and one that the people will place confidence in. -- Kansas Prairie Dog, 30 July 1885.
Thanks to Kim Fowles for contributing the above news items and to Landon Fowles for providing technical assistance to her in designing this page!
|
|
|