ering the forty acres described above. In a letter to the editor, dated May 18, 1914, the late J. J. Hawthorne, of Fremont, Nebraska, expressed the opinion that the site in question, still known as Capitol Hill, was so called because the commissioners who, in 1867, chose Lincoln for the capital, looked with favor upon it, and that Neapolis was on the high ground about two miles farther east. Mr. Hawthorne argues plausibly, in support of this opinion, that the sawmill would naturally be built close to the town for which it was designed to supply lumber and it was situated on the river bank just below his preferred site of Neapolis, in the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of section 29, township 17, range 8. He says that a town site called Buffalo was established, subsequently to the Neapolis incident, about a mile east of Capitol Hill, on land now included in the Jack Staats farm. The township plat, in the office of the commissioner of public lands and buildings, contains the boundary of Buffalo. It was nearly a mile in length, east and west, and two-thirds of a mile north and south. It lay chiefly in section 26-immediately south of section 23 which contained a part of the site of Neapolis-but it extended eastward into section 25 about an eighth of a mile, and its north boundary was a little more than an eighth of a mile south of the line between sections 23 and 26. Moreover, the plat discloses that the township lines of this township were run in August and September 1857, and the subdivisions between September 25 and October 12, 1857; so that Buffalo was laid out a long time before the site of Neapolis was selected and was too far east to be mistaken for the capital site which Mr. Hawthorne thought was likely. This theory gave him opportunity to suppose that Neapolis was situated a mile farther east than Buffalo and so quite near the sawmill.

name.

Public records rudely shut the door against the fancy that the capital commissioners of 1867 flirted with Capitol Hill and incidentally or otherwise gave it the The capital removal bill of that year confined their search for a site to Seward county, the south half of Butler and Saunders and that part of Lancaster lying north of the south boundary of township 9. On the journey of investigation, the commissioners followed Salt Creek from Lancaster to Ashland. Thence, quoting from their report, 26 we went northwesterly along the old California trail through Saunders county, crossing the Wahoo near its head, and arriving at nightfall at the residence of J. D. Brown, in Butler county." Mr. Brown's residence was on Oak Creek. The commissioners proceeded westerly to the north fork of the Blue and then southerly along that stream. They did not go farther north than township 14 which lies in the south half of Butler county. Thomas P. Kennard, one of the commissioners, says now (1914) that they had no reason for going as far north as the Platte river and did not go beyond the territory within which the removal act confined the location of the new capital.

The comptroller of the treasury of the United States decided in the Oregon case that the members who met at Oregon City should be paid their per diem allowance, but that those that assembled at Salem should not be paid; also that "no expense incurred by the members who assembled at Salem should be paid. Of course, their journals nor proceedings of any kind are to be paid for at the public expense."27 The rule was followed in the Nebraska case, and apparently without dispute, since

26 Senate Journal 1869, page 300.

27 Executive Documents, first session thirty-second Congress, volume XII, document 104, page 9.

Ely Palmer, Farmstead, South Slope of Capitol Hill.

Neapolis site, three miles northeast of Cedar Bluffs. Photographed February 17, 1917.

there is no account of any controversy in the federal records. Of course the endorsement of the proceedings at Salem reversed the decision of the executive department.

Robert W. Furnas, member of the Council and also editor of The Nebraska Advertiser, published the following comprehensive story of the incident in his newspaper of January 28, 1858.

Last week we promised to place before our readers the real cause of the difficulty which occurred at Omaha, on the 7th and 8th of the present month. In doing, so we need not consume time or space with a lengthly exordium. All know that the recent session of the Legislature at Omaha was broken up: That the majority temporarily adjourned to Florence, the nearest point at which accommodations could be had, and there proceeded to discharge its legitimate functions: That the minority remained at Omaha, adjourning from day to day for want of a quorum, occupying the time, and spending the money of the people in taking evidence of interested parties;publishing in pamphlet form, and sending abroad, to endeavor if possible to make the public believe that they themselves thought they were acting correctly.-Delusive idea!

The defense of the majority as to their adjourning to Florence is most ably set forth by the Committee appointed to wait upon the Governor, and which was published in our paper last week. It is unnecessary to add another word.

The minority has put forth a pamphlet purporting to be a "report of the joint committee of investigation, appointed to examine into the causes and consequences of the difficulty in the Nebraska Legislature which occurred January 7th and 8th, 1858," to which we will give attention in a future article, in its proper place in the programme of investigation. We will say however, here, that it like much else that is being said by individuals, and the very few papers in the Territory which sympathize with the minority, does not touch-not even hintat the real question or subject matter at issue.

The minority gravely charge the majority of "having deliberately and premeditately broken up the sitting of the Legislature; paralyzed its action, and prevented the transaction of all legitimate legislation.' We shall at present simply narrate the train of circumstances, which in our opinion led to the unhappy and much to be regretted result on the 7th and 8th, and in future articles treat of connecting points, or side issues, and leave the people, who are to be the jury in this