The Civil War more severely disrupted the families of Kentucky than it did in any other state. Kentucky, a border state, after much debate, locally, and at the state capital, remained in the Union. Every county in Eastern Kentucky saw their resident's sympathy divided between the Union and Confederacy. Generally the Republicans supported the Union and the Democrats, the South. The differences continued to be a divisive influence in the lives of our Kentucky ancestors. At least three major events occurred in this area in the post-Civil War decades, which prolonged factional differences. An election in 1874 again fueled the flames.

Thomas Hargis grew up in the area, which is now Rowan County Kentucky. It had before the Civil War been part of Fleming and Morgan County. In 1856, the southeastern portion of Fleming County and the northern portion of Morgan County were carved off and named Rowan County. Hargis began his study of the law before the War commenced and resumed it shortly after the conclusion of the War. He studied under H. G. Burns beginning in 1860. Hargis joined the Confederate Army and served as a Captain. Burns testified in 1874 that Hargis resumed his studies in 1865 and entered into the practice of law in the spring of 1866. Since that time Burns and Hargis practiced together.

In 1874, Captain Thomas Hargis (rather poignantly, in the latter half of the nineteenth century, nearly every Kentucky citizen was referred to by his military rank, even though he had not been in the service since the War) was the Democratic nominee for circuit judge for the fourteen district of Kentucky. His opponent was George M. Thomas, a "prominent Republican" from Vanceburg. At this time, Thomas Green, Editor of the Maysville Eagle, charged that Hargis was not eligible for the office because he had not entered into the practice of law at the proscribed time. The legal requirement was that the candidate must have practiced law for a minimum of eight years by August 1, in the year of the election. Green claimed that the required signatures, those of two presiding judges, had not been placed on the law license until sometime in August of 1866, thus making Hargis ineligible for the office. According to a recent account, the charge, which was made by Green, was a primary reason for the defeat of Hargis by Thomas.

Rowan County Judge William Stewart who was a Republican, testified on Hargis' behalf in 1874. "I, William Stewart, state that I was Justice of the Peace in Rowan County from 1864 to 1870, continuously, and that I know Thomas F. Hargis and have known him since July, 1865, and I know that Thomas F. Hargis was and did practice law before me in my court at my spring term 1866, in various suits. And I have no doubt about this fact, of which I am certain, he had been practicing law at Morehead before the August election, 1866, at which election said Hargis was s candidate for County Judge. I am a Republican in politics and have been. I knew said Hargis well in the fall of 1865 and the winter of 1865 and 1866. I was frequently in his office, and he always had his law-books and I thought he was studying hard."

Cyrus Alley, who served as the Clerk of Rowan County Court made the following statement on April 25, 1874. "I Cyrus Alley, state that I was Clerk of the Rowan County Court from 1865 to 1870, continuously and also Clerk of the Rowan Circuit and Quarterly Courts during the whole of the above period, form 1863 to 1870, and Thomas F. Hargis, who then wrote his name T. J. F. Hargis, was sworn in as a practicing attorney-at-law in the Rowan County Court some time in the spring of 1866, either in the month of April or May of 1866, and he was also sworn in the Circuit Court in August, 1866, and during that year I was very intimate with Mr. Hargis, and employed him as my attorney and have since employed him in various important suits."

Alley attested to a statement made by his wife in support of Hargis. "I Nannie K. Alley, state that I am the wife of Cyrus Alley, who was formerly Clerk of the Rowan Circuit and County Courts, and that I was well acquainted with Thomas Hargis in the year 1866 and that upon one occasion I well remember of having a conversation with said Thomas F. Hargis about his practicing law. I remember that he had not then been practicing long, and this conversation was some time in the spring of 1866, and I think either in the month of April or May 1866."

Hargis further clarified the above statement of Cyrus Alley by presenting another affidavit signed by Alley on May 27, 1874. At that time Alley stated, "I, Cyrus Alley state that Thomas F. Hargis was sworn in to practice law in the Rowan County Court, at the courthouse in the town of Morehead at the May term of said court, 1866. I have looked over the orders of April, 1866, none being missing , and none in that month in reference to him. I can therefore state the month and this was the meaning of the first certificate I gave him. I was then Clerk of the Rowan County and Circuit Courts."

D. Bowling, a Justice of the Peace in Morehead made the following statement on April 25, 1874. "I certify that I have lived in Rowan County for near eight years, since May 15, 1866, and that I know Thomas F. Hargis during the whole of that time: was frequently in his law office in 1866, from June until until the first Monday in August, and afterward until he moved to Carlisle. And before the August election, 1866, I do positively know that Mr. Hargis was practicing law, because I frequently consulted with him. And he was my attorney, all the time he practiced in Morehead, Kentucky."

The July 5, 1879 edition of the Louisville Courier-Journal reported that "Judge Thomas' deposition was taken at Vanceburg Thursday. He says he was at Morehead at the August term, 1866, and saw Judge Andrews and Apperson in a room with Thomas F. Hargis, and Judge Andrews said they had given Hargis license to practice law. No further facts were elicited, and no other depositions taken."

On the following day, the Courier-Journal printed a correction to the previous story. "It seems to be Mr. (Thomas) Green's settled policy not to withdraw from newspaper controversy, as he said he would, but to have the testimony in his case against Judge Hargis magnified by newspaper accounts into undue importance. The dispatch from Vanceburg in yesterday's Cincinnati Commercial perhaps was written or dictated by Mr. Green himself, as he is the correspondent of that paper. It is a gross misrepresentation of Judge Thomas' testimony. The remark which Judge Thomas states he heard Judge Andrews use on the first night of the August term, 1866, of the Rowan Circuit Court was that they had given Mr. Hargis his license, and not that they had just given him his license, as indicated in said dispatch, and as Mr. Green's attorney tried hard to get Judge Thomas to testify, But Judge Thomas expressly says in cross-examination that Judge Andrews fixed no time and did not say when the license was granted and signed, and for all he personally knew or heard, Judge Andrews say on that occasion, Judge Hargis' license may have been signed by Judge Andrews in February, 1866 and by Judge Apperson in April, 1866 instead. Of Judge Thomas' deposition being thought to be very damaging to Judge Hargis, it was at Vanceburg and is also here regarded as quite weak and of no importance whatever as legal evidence. The proof already taken by Mr. Green is a break-down and many believe he will yet abandon his case, having so far failed to establish positively and definitely the material facts necessary to sustain his charges."

Judge L. W. Andrews testified that he didn't think he signed the license of Thomas Hargis in February 1866, but in August 1866. The license was presented to him with his signature affixed along with that of Judge Apperson, and was determined to be genuine. "The witness having recognized the genuineness of the license upon its presentation to him by the defendant, and also of his own signature to it and that it may be true that he signed it in February 1866, although it had escaped his recollection, it remains now to be proven when Judge Apperson affixed his signature to the license. The burden of the testimony so far has been upon these two points, and has developed the following facts: First--that the license is genuine and bears the genuine signatures of L. W. Andrews and E. Apperson, Jr . Second--that it may be true that L. W. Andrews affixed his signature to it at its date, on the 26th day of February 1866.

Thomas Hargis reported that the license stated the following:

Hargis further explained that, "The license was completed by Judge Apperson who affixed his signature to it at the April term, 1866 of the Carter Circuit Court, in the presence of myself and Samuel R. Elliott, brother of my lamented predecessor." In support of this statement, Hargis presented the swore and attested statement of Samuel Elliott who reported, "In justice to Thomas Hargis, I felt it my duty to give this certificate for the public to see. There has been much said in regard to the time said Hargis should have obtained his license to practice law. I here state I was at Grayson Court (Carter County) in April, 1866. I then and there saw Judge Apperson sign Thomas Hargis' license to practice law, I will qualify to the above statement whenever called upon. Given under my hand this 20th day of June, 1874."

In a report appearing in the Courier-Journal issue of July 15,1879, issued from Owingsville, Kentucky, Judge James M. Nesbitt testified that he had known Thomas Hargis since he was a boy and that Hargis had shown him his license which had one signature affixed in Feb. 1866. This unequivocally refuted the claims of Green. This was a pre-trial deposition.

This compelling testimony was given in 1874 and presented again in 1879 by Judge Thomas Hargis because Thomas Green, the Editor of the Maysville Eagle published reports that Hargis did not meet statutory requirements for office, because he had not been in the practice of law for the legally prescribed length of time. In 1874, Hargis was the Democratic candidate for the 14th District Circuit Court Judgeship. Hargis presented this evidence but was defeated in his bid for the bench of the Circuit Court.

The plot of the charges thickened, when Jake Tabor, a Clerk in the Rowan County Court, claimed that Hargis had taken the county court books out of the courthouse and when he returned them, the books had been mutilated and altered. Hargis caused Tabor to be indicted for the mutilation.

When Hargis, in 1879, became a candidate for the Appellate Court Bench, to replace the late Judge John Milton Elliott, Green again published his charges from the 1874 election. The Judge Elliott saga was also in the news in 1879. Judge Elliott had been assassinated by a loser in a civil trial. The litigant, had lost his life's savings in somewhat of a boondoggle, and the lower court had found in favor of the other party. When the case came to the Appellate Court, Judge Elliott, in what appeared to be the appropriate legal action, upheld the lower court ruling and made the man virtually penniless. The appellant later came after Judge Elliott and shot him down in front of several witnesses. The man was in 1879 found not guilty by reason of insanity. He later escaped from the mental facility where he was being held and went to Indiana. The Governor of Indiana refused all requests to return the man to Kentucky.

In spite a Green's accusations, Hargis was this time elected to the bench and hethen attacked Green in print in the Louisville Courier-Journal. In response, Green filed a libel suit in Franklin County Court. Hargis' response to the suit was a summary of the above attested facts, along with the charge that Green was aware that what he had printed was false.

The Courier-Journal reported on Wednesday, July 10, 1879 that "yesterday the answer of Judge Thomas F. Hargis to the petition of Mr. Thomas M. Green was filed in the Common Pleas court and is as follows.

Thomas M. Green, plaintiff, vs. Thomas F. Hargis, defendant-Answer.

The defendant, Thomas F. Hargis comes and says that he was served with summons in this action in Franklin County, which is not the county of his residence and not the county in which the alleged wrongs were committed, and therefore that the said service does not give this court jurisdiction of his person, but he hereby expressly waives such want of jurisdiction and enters his appearance. He says further that the petition does not set out a cause of action, but nevertheless for answer thereto, he says, the plaintiff did in the year 1874 compose and publish certain statements charging that defendant was ineligible to the office of Circuit Judge for the Fourteenth Judicial district at the August election in 1874, and asserting his (plaintiff's) belief that defendant had mutilated or caused to be mutilated, certain records of the Circuit and County Courts of Rowan County; and said plaintiff did in May, 1879, revive and circulate the said charge that defendant was ineligible as aforesaid, and had mutilated or caused to be mutilated said court records, which charge was false and so known to be to plaintiff when he composed and published the same as well in May, 1879 as in 1874.

Further answering, the defendant says he did compose and write and did procure and caused to be published in the newspaper mentioned in plaintiff's petition, viz. The Courtier-Journal, a communication containing the words, language and statements set out in the petition herein. Said communication is in words and figures as follows.

"In 1874, I was nominated by a Democratic convention as a candidate for Circuit Judge. It was charged that I was ineligible to the office, and that for the purpose of destroying the proof of my ineligibility and of establishing my false claim, that I was eligible, I mutilated, or caused to be mutilated, certain records of the Circuit and County Courts of Rowan County.

Out of respect for that portion of the people of Kentucky who are not familiar with the persons who originally concocted this charge, and have recently revived and circulated it, nor with the facts as known to those who know the parties and witnesses to this assault upon me, I do now solemnly declare that the charge, in whatever form, or by whomsoever made or insinuated, is false. I do further denounce those who have heretofore, and those who do hereafter circulate this charge as willful calumniators. As my only answer to the charge, I declare that I was eligible to the office of Circuit Judge at the election in August 1874 and therefore was wholly without motive to commit the crime charged. In proof of my eligibility, I submit the following papers:

"And defendant says he did mean and intend to apply to this plaintiff the language complained of and set out in his (plaintiff's) petition. But defendant says he had the right in law to compose, write and cause to be published, as aforesaid , the said communication, especially the words, language and statements complained of because he says, said language, words and statements and in fact all the statements contained in said communication, are true and were true when published."

On August 15, 1879 a report appeared in the Courier-Journal which reported that the Rowan County Courthouse had been burglarized and documents pertinent to the Green-Hargis lawsuit had been removed. The report stated that photographic copies of the documents were obtained and had been stored in another location.

In October, 1879, while Hargis was in attendance at Court in Morehead in a matter related to the case, his briefcase containing some of the swore statements in support of his case, was stolen from his room in James Carey's hotel, Gault House. Later testimony linked John Martin, a friend of Jack Tabor to the theft. In 1886 D. Boone Logan stated in a letter to the Mt. Sterling Sentinel-Democrat that, "the reader will recollect that Judge Hargis' valise which contained his law license was stolen while here at Morehead, and that John Martin was charge with the theft, and that Martin was a witness against Hargis for Green." Logan also reported that "A. M. Bowling, was marshal of Morehead at the time, and a witness for Hargis. During this trial Martin and Bowling became inveterate enemies of each other."

Boone Logan continued his description of the outcome of the Green-Hargis Trial. "In that trial the maligners of Hargis learned to testify to whatever their vicious impulses caused them to tell, or they heard told, with as much solemnity as if it had been a sacred truth. Here in this county almost to the man who held up the hands of Tom Green and accepted his base lies for gracious truths, have been the men (and women) who took a delight in traducing the character of every gentleman or lady who did not stand by and uphold the conduct of Cook Humphrey and his hireling followers and on the other hand condemn the men against whom their calumny was hurled and who were the intended victims of their deadly hatred and hireling rapacities."

The C-J report in July 1879 the trial of Thomas Buford, who was charged with killing Appellate Judge John M. Elliott. The 1956 Centennial Issue of the Rowan County News, claimed that Elliott County, which was formed in 1869, was named after the assassinated judge. This article was likely to have been written by the wife of McClosky, who wrote Rowan's Progress, a book, which contained a rehash of the previous accounts of the Martin-Tolliver Feud. On July 14, 1879, a brief note appeared in the Courier-Journal, reporting that Judge Nesbitt had recently sworn in court, that the date of Hargis license, as Hargis stated, is correct. The article also mentioned that Tabor swore that he did not mutilate the Rowan County Court documents. The trial was reported to be upcoming.

In a follow-up report in August, 1879, attorneys for Green told the Courier-Journal that their interest in pursuing the liable charge against Judge Hargis, "is not over and that they are investigating possible forgery in the Court books, which occurred allegedly in 1874." John Martin was a busy man in the late 1870s. In 1877 he was tried in Rowan County for the murder of Press Blair, who was the brother-in-law of his wife. Blair, who had previously been associated with the Underwood clan of Carter County, had reportedly decided to end his outlaw days. He reportedly had written a confession, which named several people and crimes of which they were guilty. His complicity was also admitted. Testimony was given that Martin, who was allegedly named in Blair's confession, called Blair out of his house one morning and shot him dead. Martin produced witnesses to testify to his actions on the day in question, and a credible alibi was given him. He was found not guilt in a court in Rowan County in late 1877.

Martin did not rest on his laurels. As stated elsewhere in the 1879 Courier-Journal, he and Jake Tabor were arrested in the fall of 1877 on the Ohio River, and charged with horse stealing. The two were returned to Morehead, where they posted bond. Martin then sought refuge with the father of his old horse thieving friend, Alfred Underwood. Alfred's father, George Underwood directed Martin and Tabor to a nearby plot of land, owned by a neighbor, who agreed to lease to them. Reports claim that the pair and their families settled in to raise a crop and money to pay the expenses to be incurred as defendants in their upcoming trial. Martin and Tabor also apparently had the means to procure a second source of income.

Howard Logan and Henry Logan were fairly prosperous men who lived in Rowan County. Later testimony indicted both of them as long term collaborators in a ring of horse thieves. One of their own was charged with the theft of a horse owned by a man named Stamper of Carter County. The man, Alexander Pendlum, or Pendland, also sought protection under the Underwood umbrella.

Underwood's prophecy was fulfilled on the night of Sunday October 14, 1879, when between 5 and 20 black-faced men approached his house. One report claimed that the men demanded entry to confirm the death of Jesse Underwood. Jesse's decomposing body had lain in the Underwood home since his death because George Underwood was bed-ridden and no one else would risk the Holbrook threats and assist with his burial. Another report, by an eye-witness who was in Fort Underwood that Sunday night, stated that the men wanted to enter in search of John Martin and Claibe Jones. Both reports agree that after a time of conversation and look at the body of the moldered Jesse Underwood, the men shot George Underwood through the chest and head. Floyd Hall reported that the assassins "shot out his eyes."

Relative quiet then descended on the hills of Western Carter County, disrupted only by the posting of notices by the Holbrook and Stamper Clans on the trees in Upper Tygart. These notices strongly encouraged the Underwood women to leave the county under the threat of death should they decide to remain.

John Martin apparently didn't tarry long in Floyd County. In October 1879, the valise of Judge Thomas Hargis was stolen from his room at the Gault House, the hotel run by James Carey, and Martin was later charged with the crime. James Carey, a veteran of the Mexican War,had been earlier assaulted by Martin's associate, Jake Tabor. Tabor had since left the county and moved to Kansas, after escaping from the Boyd County jail while being held on the charge of murdering a man named Trumbo. It was reportedly very difficult to find a impartial jury for the trial of John Martin. It is unclear whether is was because he had so many court appearances that the jury pool had been depleted of men who had not already tried Martin, or because his reputation was so wide-spread that an impartial juror was difficult to find. In 1888 Judge A. E. Cole was asked by a committee of the Kentucky State Legislature if he had difficulty finding good men in Rowan County to compose a jury. He replied that in general he had not, but that on one occasion for the trial of Martin, he had to go through 50 or 60 men in order to seat a jury to hear the case.

The case of Green v. Hargis lingered on into 1880. I am still researching this case, and have not completed a review of the newspaper accounts of the trial, if indeed the matter ever went to trial. No court judgment has been uncovered to document the outcome of the proceedings. The ill will created by the events continued to fester. Boone Logan reported in 1885 that friends of Hargis, at every opportunity, reportedly challenged what they consider to be lies. Neither party ever made concessions or apologies to the other, according to Logan. "Every trivial difficulty which arose between the friends or adherents of the factions tended to broaden and deepen the already distinctly defined chasm that kept ajar the avenues of slander. Especially at each election did the Green and Hargis factions martial themselves against each other, and the number on each side being about the same, the success of either depended considerably on the amount of money used and the skill with which it was used.

This story continues as The Martin-Tolliver Feud 1884-1887

The Governor of Kentucky, in his message to the Legislature in the fall of 1887, stated briefly the state of affairs in Rowan County. He had been deluged with requests for pardons for various crimes committed in Rowan County. Allegations had been made against Judge A. E. Cole, the Circuit Court Judge of the 14th District of Kentucky. Governor Bruckner recommended that a Legislative investigation be undertaken to clarify the cause for the violence in Rowan County and to provide a framework for clarification of the charges against Judge Cole. A special committee was appointed from within the Legislature. This committee met in Morehead and heard testimony from area citizens and later met in Frankfort and interviewed other participants, alleged participants, witnesses and alleged witnesses. The testimony contains little legal evidence, but much hearsay, rumor and opinion. This testimony is as close as one can get to the truth however.

Witness after witness was asked what they thought was the root of the lawlessness in Rowan County. Questions were often preceded by questions about the availability of liquor in the county. Witnesses who were question about the suitability of citizens who served on the juries in Rowan County were asked whether the person drank liquor or drank excessively. A few queries sought a possibly political motive, as the violence seemed to be divided along party lines. One statement in the more than 500 pages of testimony suggested that the original cause may have been "factional", in reference I think to the factions created by, and continued by, the multitude of differences involved in the incipience of the Civil War. The same witness continued the state that such "factional differences" had long since ceased being a reason for the "lawlessness." The one chance to actually answer the question, which had been posed, was thus cast aside almost as though the lack of a connection was apparent to all.

  The Rowan County Solution

1905 Rowan County Election Violence

1923 The Last Tolliver Falls

 The Legacy of Taylor Young