Old Marietta Papers - Number 14

The Marietta Register, December 25, 1863

"Old Marietta Papers" was a series of columns compiled and published in 1863 and 1864 by Rodney M. Stimson, editor of "The Marietta Register."

Court House Built in 1822 - Bitter Controversy as to its Location

The fact that a public meeting was held in Marietta, Sept. 13, 1819, "for ascertaining public opinion in reference to a New Court House," has already been noted. The meeting, of which Hon. John Sharp of Lawrence was Chairman, and James M. Booth, Esq., Secretary, adopted a report submitted by Ex-Gov. Meigs, Col. Levi Barber, and D. H. Buell, Esq., in favor of a Court House with fire-proof offices at the corner of Second and Putnam streets. The Report was sent to the County Commissioners as an expression of "public opinion."

For over two years afterwards we find no mention of a new Court House in the "Friend." Nov. 9, 1821, an advertisement appears, as follows:

"A Plan for the Court House, 48 feet square, with a fire-proof office in each corner, 16 feet square, will be received from any person who conceives he has a taste for drawing, and who is willing to contribute his knowledge to the convenience and elegance of a building of this kind - until the 1st day of March next, to be left at the Auditor's office."

Soon a sharp controversy sprung up in regard to the location of the new Court House. The old one stood where the jail now [1863] stands. A public meeting, as we have seen, reported in favor of the location opposite the old one, where the present Court House stands; the resolutions, plans and calculations of the Commissioners all looked to this location, and "the ground already marked out."

Jan. 11, 1822, the "Friend" published a petition to the Commissioners by the request of "Many," which petition remonstrated against the "proposed situation" as "not the most eligible" on account of mud," "greater exposedness to fire," "danger of inconvenience from inundations," and "the want of sufficient eligible room for the separate erection of fire-proof offices." The petitioners further considered "the location of these offices on spots of the dryest soil and beyond the reach of high water, a matter of the highest consequence." They therefore recommended "that the upper elevated square in Marietta, called Capitolium, situate on Washington Street and reserved by the Ohio Company for public buildings, be taken as a place whereon to erect a Court House, as being free from the above objections, and possessing the following additional recommendations," viz: "Natural elevation and beauty of situation," "artificial elevation and ancient works," "ample room," "more out of the way of loiterers," and "the consequent increase of the town."

Jan. 18, the following notice appeared: "Persons feeling interested in the location of the New Court House, near the old one, are requested to meet at the Court House in Marietta tomorrow at 2 o'clock, P.M."

Feb. 1, a "Counter Petition" (against the one for the Capitolium location) was published in the "Friend." It was a mere communication, answering the objections to the present location of the Court House on account of "mud," danger of "fire," "inundations," and "want of room," it considers the location as "central," &c; and then pitches into the Capitolium location as being "out of sight, remote from inhabitants, and hardly accessible," and it was asked, "Who owns the land?" and "what to be done with the contracts already made, the underpinning, and the old jail?"

Feb. 8, the "Friend" contained three communications in reference to this matter. A "Plain Man" argued for the Capitolium location, holding that it would advance the general interest of both town and county," and he met the objections as to "title" to land, "existing contracts," &c. "Highlander" sharply and sarcastically criticised the article of "Counter Petitioner," who had written against the Capitolium as "hardly accessible," "up a steep hill," "out of sight," &c. And "A Petitioner" publishes an incisive article on the same side.

"March 5, it was editorially stated that the petition for removing to the Capitolium contained the names of 1172 persons. This was a larger number than had ever voted in the county at any election, but the Commissioners - Daniel Goodno of Belpre, Samuel Beach of Waterford, and Amzi Stanley of Marietta - rejected the petition and resolved to erect the Court House on Fifth Street at the place where the town of Marietta should select, between the bottom on said street and the burying ground square, including the square on condition that the subscribers to that site should contribute more money and materials for the Court House than should be contributed by those in favor of the old site, corner of Second and Putnam, and should also remove gratuitously the materials collected at the old site to the new one, when the old site should be surrendered to the subscribers to the new one.

March 27, town meeting held at the Court House, D. H. Buell, Esq., Chairman. A resolution to donate a site for Court House from the Mound Square (Mound Cemetery) was voted down - 75 yeas, 116 nays.

The "sense of the present meeting" was then taken on the question that "the southerly end of the square, opposite the house of H. P. Wilcox, Esq., on Putnam Street, known as the Thierry lots, is a suitable site for a Court House," &c., and carried - yeas 100, nays 90. The meeting then adjourned. This location was in the square now occupied by the College.

The "Thierry lots" party subscribed $1061.50; the party for the old site did not subscribe anything. The Commissioners then required a title to the new site "as good" as that of the old one.

April 12, the Commissioners published an address "To the Citizens of the County of Washington," in which they refer to "much agitation of the public mind" in reference to the location of the Court House. They speak of "liberal offers" for the Court House by the citizens of Harmar, refer to the location on the Plain, sum up by considering "validity of title paramount to all other considerations," and taking into view "all the facts," &c., "have resolved to erect the county buildings on the old site" on lots given for that purpose by Dudley Woodbridge, Esq. (Sen.), and the late Col. Ebenezer Sproat, on one of which the old Court House stands" and to proceed with the work "with dispatch."

This settled the location where the Court House and Jail now stand. But next week, April 19, a long communication signed by Caleb Emerson, Ichabod Nye, and John Cotton, "Committee for subscribers on the Plain," shows up the County Commissioners in a style that id decidedly refreshing. They charge the Commissioners with "evading their solemn engagements," &c.; but it was of no use - the Plain men, although, according to the Committee they had the majority, had subscribed the money, had fulfilled all the conditions required of them, were yet defeated by the "will of the Commissioners."