Structural failures, fires and questionable elections converge at Titus County courthouse
Ed's note: When Texas Historical Commission researchers began their writing project on East Texas courthouses, it came to light that the commission had no files concerning Titus County. Spending a couple of days in courthouse minutes and library newspaper files, we addressed that issue for THC writers Bob Brinkman and Dan Utley, inviting them to feel free to use whatever they want of this saga in their article to be published in the East Texas Historical Journal.
A 19th century fire said to be of suspicious origin, a mysterious structural failure, a crumbling tower and the questionable nature of the ballot box in the 1930's in Titus County provide mystery and political intrigue to the story of Titus County's Courthouse.
"The first courthouse was a log structure built in 1847 on the present courthouse square," wrote Traylor Russell in his History of Titus County.
Titus county was created in May, 1846 by action of the First Legislature of the State of Texas. Construction of the first public buildings in the county seat of Mt. Pleasant was financed by the sale of property donated by John Binion Sr., Richard Moore and L. Gilbert. The courthouse stood on a lot donated by an early businessman, Elam Riddle, according to a story written in 1961 by East Texas State Teachers College journalism student Nancy Hendricks.
Commissioners court minutes that would have dealt with courthouse construction issues in those first 30 years - along with the rest of the records of the county's first three decades - went up in smoke the evening of September 20, 1895.
"It was generally felt that the fire was started intentionally and rumors at the time were many," Miss Hendricks wrote in her article published in the Mt. Pleasant Daily Times. "Most of the talk was that someone set fire to the court house to destroy the indictment records."
According to Mr. Russell, the log courthouse stood on the northeast corner of the square and served the county until a two story frame structure was built in the center of the square a few years later. The second floor was used as the Masonic Lodge.
Both Mr. Russell and Miss Hendricks report that the second courthouse was sold in 1859.
"According to files in the office of the Texas Secretary of State, money could not be raised in a reasonable length of time to pay the installments," Miss Hendricks wrote, following that with a gap in local lore. "No one knows why the court house had to be sold and yet another one could be built in the same year."
Both writers say the frame building was replaced with a two-story brick building.
Both writers say the county's first brick courthouse mysteriously collapsed - Miss Hendricks says that was during the latter part of the Civil War, which ended in 1865. Mr. Russell puts the date at 1867. She says the building was repaired and stood until the fire of 1895. He says the courthouse that burned that year was built new after the old one fell.
At this point, the story as told by Miss Hendricks begins to dovetail with the oldest minutes of the commissioners on record, a special session held September 23, 1895, three days after the fire. Both the minutes of that meeting and Miss Hendricks reference a "vault" that was on the courthouse square, but not a part of the courthouse structure.
County Judge T.F. Waller was authorized to look for temporary quarters for commissioners meetings, district court and county offices.
On October 16, 1895, the court approved plans presented by F.B. and W.S. Hull, of Dallas, for a new courthouse and approved payment to the same firm of $330 for 200 feet of new shelving and repairs made on the courthouse vault. Assuming the vault was a separate structure, it looks like there were two fires the night of the 20th, lending credence to that suspicious origin rumor.
With the judge and commissioners each drawing $3 per meeting, and the sheriff drawing $2 for "attending the needs of the court," at meetings in the weeks following the fire the court also approved the sale of salvaged brick for $4 per thousand and voted to advertise for courthouse construction bids in The Dallas Morning News. These were days before social legislation of 1933's New Deal -- in routine business, the court addressed payment to individuals for the care of paupers.
In November, the court approved contractor J.A. Wilson's bid of $21,240 for construction of a new courthouse whose plans included a graceful bell tower reaching above the town.
In the mean time, the court was to meet in the Opera Hall located on the second floor of a brick building on the east side of the square and owned by I.N. Williams.
|
In January, the county paid F.B. and W.S. Hull $18, the balance due for work done on the courthouse vault; in February the county paid Mr. Williams $30 for three months rent on his Opera Hall, which was also used for district court proceedings.
F.B. and W.S. Hull got half of their $743 tab for preparation of courthouse plans, but at its second February meeting, the court ordered the Hulls to return to "defend their specifications" after the contractor reported that the plans were insufficient, "not secure for such a size building."
Taking matters of structural integrity into its hands, in March the court authorized the hiring of a building superintendent to oversee construction; in April, the court "allowed the sum of $250 on the balance due" for the Hulls original plans. At its second April meeting, the price of the courthouse jumped $1,450, contractor Wilson's price for additional foundation work.
Building Superintendent H.C. Barlow drew $75 a month for his services.
In other business, the court approved payment of 75 cents to George Baker for removing drift wood beneath the White Oak Creek bridge. A local merchant got $19.60 for a pauper's coffin - four months later a motion passed resolving that the county would henceforth pay no more than $6 for a pauper's coffin.
In June, the court okayed changing brick from "St. Louis Buff" to "Millsap Red Brick of the best grade, uniformity and color provided."
In December, construction of the tower came to a halt when the brick used there began crumbling, the tower collapsing beneath its own weight.
In January, 1897, more than a year after construction began, contractor Wilson was paid an additional $1,600 for construction of a second courthouse tower.
On March 26 the court accepted the new courthouse, completed to its satisfaction.
In the spring of 1936, Titus County was changed forever with the oil strike at Talco. New tax dollars came rolling into county coffers.
In March, 1939, the county court voted to hold a $160,000 bond election for a new courthouse.
Two weeks later, L.F. Benson, local attorney at law, launched a broadside at the bond issue, a message published in the Mt. Pleasant Daily Times March 26 edition.
Quoting a telegram to county commissioners from Congressman Wright Patman that the county was in line to receive an $89,000 courthouse grant "when appropriations are made," Counselor Benson asked why county officials "failed to give voters this information? Why all the secrecy about it?"
He launched an argument of numbers, questioned the rate of interest approved for the sale of bonds and openly doubted the court's ability to supervise the election.
Citing a 25-cent tax rate dedicated to a courthouse improvement fund and the $20,000 he said that levy generated annually, plus $40,000 in hand in that fund, plus the $160,000 bond package, he tallied $289,000 for courthouse construction.
"And they want to bond you for 15 years at 4 ½ percent interest," he said, following that observation by citing bonds sold by the city of Talco at 2 ½ percent.
"This extra 2 percent is the BOND RACKETEER'S INTEREST," he said.
That higher rate of interest might have been related to a judgement against the county, just prior to the call for the election, for defaulting on road construction bonds issued some 20 years earlier.
Citing voting irregularities that ultimately caused results of the December, 1937 wet-dry election to be thrown out, Mr Benson said "the County Judge was called upon to give the opposing side of this bond election one supervisor in each election box.
"I, personally, believe that any man who would resent this request, in view of our past experience, should have a supervisor who would watch him carefully. Don't you? To date, this request stands refused by the county judge. Why?" Counselor Benson asked.
The next day, The Times answered with a front page editorial beneath the headline "Titus County Needs New Courthouse."
District Judge I. N. Williams weighed in, opposing the bond issue.
The newspaper had to love it.
"Taxpayers of Titus County Who Are For the Bond Issue" bought a full page.
"It seems that the campaign of certain persons against the bond issue has become nothing but a campaign of vilification and abuse," that side said, juggling the money numbers cited by Counselor Benson in a different light before quoting from Judge Williams ad, which argued for remodeling the existing courthouse.
As for vilification - "Speaking of Judge Williams," proponents said, "it is not to be overlooked that he does not reside in Titus County, that he holds court in a building costing hundreds of thousands of dollars at a salary of $6,500 and with a well-paid stenographer at his elbow.
(This I.N. Williams, the son of the I.N. Williams from whom the county had rented an Opera Hall following the 1895 fire, had been elected as a district judge in Texarkana.)
"He owns interest in 18 oil wells, has hundreds of acres of oil land and owns various properties in the city including brick buildings in Mt. Pleasant."
With the election two days away, the judge responded, saying he wasn't opposed to the bond issue "because it would cost me a lot of money. The most it would cost me would be $82." He said he had appealed to the court to hold a mass meeting "where the voice of the people might have been heard before this election was ordered. And to show my sincerity . . . I offered to execute a written agreement to contribute the amount it would cost me each year to any religious or charitable organization in Titus County that the court would name."
With charges couched in language ever more eloquent, another joined the cause.
"They cry that someone has charged the judge and commissioners with being liars, thieves and crooks," yet another local attorney wrote. "I recall no charge like that having been made. In his hour of danger, the infidel calls on God, the anarchist calls on his government and county officials call on the people to pass on their honesty in this election . . . We shall be glad to let the results decide the issue on election day. I predict the bond's defeat by a margin of eight to one."
April 2, 1939 headlines made that prediction a near prophesy. "Court House Bonds are Defeated Saturday by and Enormous Majority," read the page one banner. A kicker over the story leaned on partial returns available at press time, showing the issue going down by a five to one margin.
For eight months, the issue cooled. Putting aside the ballot box, at its December 22, 1939 meeting the county court compromised, voting to advertise for bids for courthouse renovation instead of new construction.
"The contractor must adhere to prevailing rates of wages as established by the commissioners' court," they said, including in their minutes hourly wage rates of "25 cents for common labor, 40 cents for semi-skilled labor and 75 cents for skilled labor." The court capped warrants at $20,000, leaning on reserve funds of $35,000 for the balance of the project.
In January, the court approved O.L. Crigler's bid of $51,834 with the renovation project to be completed in 120 days.
The price went up in April when the commissioners approved an additional $32,000 for new furniture and for paving the courthouse square.
The old bell tower was torn down and additional space was added along with four flush toilets. Titus County was on the move and in July, the county accepted the newly remodeled courthouse.
That lasted until February, 1961 when the court appointed a 25-member citizen committee to study the courthouse. In May, the court approved issuance of $100,000 in warrants.
In March of 1962, the county hired Grogan Supply Company, an Atlanta, Texas-based building supplier with a Mt. Pleasant yard, doing business as Newman Construction, to begin remodeling again. Having gone from 19th century sandstone red brick with a graceful bell tower, to blocky art deco with a stucco facade in the 40's, architect Louis B. Gohmert's plans rocketed the courthouse into the sizzling 60's. Three-story steel panels, battleship grey, were broken with strong vertical lines of dull silver beams, converting the look of the courthouse to a geometric study. After getting flush toilets twenty years earlier, this time the court house got air conditioning - window units.
|
The air conditioning was an after-thought concession, an add-on; originally to be completed in seven months, it was a year and a half before the job was completed. During the interim, in addition to other routine business, the court approved continued payment of the $10 bounty for anybody killing a coyote and providing the ears as evidence.
That modern, raw look of structural steel worked for 30 years. In March of 1990, the county bought the old Guaranty Bond Bank building on the south side of the square, remodeled the interior and vacated the courthouse for a new construction project.
Meanwhile, Mt. Pleasant was designated as a Texas Main Street City, an economic development program anchored in preserving the historic look of Texas main streets. In keeping with that idea, in January of 1991 the county approved architect Kent Harris's plans to return the courthouse to its 1940 look. Clark Construction Company of Clarksville submitted the winning bid of $714,000 for the project which began in February and was completed in the late summer of 1991.