wrought under the present constitution, which cannot be understood by the younger members of the profession. Judge Higgins was succeeded in 1837 by Ozias Bowen, of Marion, who held our court for two or three terms, until in the winter of 1838-39, when the legislature made a new judicial circuit of ten of the northwestern counties, including Lucas and Wood, when E. D. Potter was chosen as the president judge. He immediately purchased of Jonathan Neel of Maumee a magnificent horse, on which he rode proudly on his journeys through his circuit. He served his term and earned the title of an upright and honest judge: The salary of the judges was about $1,200 per annum, until 1842, when the legislature reduced the pay to $2.00 per.day. (Sunday in-eluded), which was the munificent sum for which Myron H. Tilden, in 1844, left his successful practice and became the successor of Judge Potter. Of the five judges who presided in our courts up to about 1850, one is still living. Judge Potter died February 12, 1896; Judge Tilden, who moved in 1851 to Cincinnati, died in 1888; and Judge E. B. Sadler, of Sandusky City, is yet in the active pursuit of his profession. Judge Higgins left the profession in 1846, and moved to Washington, where he took a position in one of the departments, which he held until his death in January, 1874, being then over eighty years of age. Judge Bowen was elevated to the Supreme Bench under the present constitution. served one term with mnch credit and died about 1876.

The judges of the Common Pleas Court, from the retirement therefrom of Judge Tilden down to and including the present occupants of the Bench, have been and are as follows: E. B. Sadler, L. B. Otis, John Fitch, Samuel T, Worcester, S. F. Taylor, Walter F. Stone, William G. Lane, William A. Collins, T. P. Finefrock, Reuben C. Lemmon, Joshua R. Seney, James French, Charles E. Pennewell, Birdseye W. Rouse, Cooper K. Watson, William F. Judge Lockwood, John Mackey, John H. Doyle, Isaac P. Pugsley, David H. Commager, George R. Haynes, Louis H. Pike, C. P. Wickham, J. M. Lemmon, J. L. Dewitt, John L. Greene, Gilbert Harmon, Lindley W. Morris, Charles Pratt and Jason A. Barber. Judge E. B, Sadler was called to the Bench on the resignation of Judge Tilden in the spring of 1847, and was succeeded under the new Constitution in 1851 by L. B. Otis, who served until 1855. Judge Fitch was elected in the fall of 1854, taking his seat on February 9, 1855, under an act providing for an additional judge for the subdivision. He held the office for fifteen years, being succeeded in 1870 by Judge William A.  Collins, who served one term of five years. Judge R. C. Lemmon was elected as his successor and served continually until February 9, 1890 (three full terms).

The legislature at its session of 1870-1, provided for an additional judge for the first subdivision of the Fourth Judicial District; and at the spring election of 1871, Joshua R. Seney was elected. to such position. He resigned in November, 1874, when James J. French was appointed by Governor Allen serve until the next annual election, at which time Birdseye W. Rouse was elected to fill the unexpired term, and also the full term thence ensuing. An additional judge had also been created by statute in 1869, and Judge Charles


E. Pennewell of Norwalk, and T. P. Finefrock of Freemont had successively held the office, when, in 1879, John H. Doyle was elected to succeed Judge Finefrock, and held the office until 1883, at which time his elevation to the Supreme Bench caused a vacancy, which was filled by appointment of Isaac P. Pugsley, and afterwards by election of Judge Commager. Charles P. Wickham, of Huron county, was elected to succeed Judge Rouse, in 1880, and was re-elected in 1885, serving almost wholly in Huron, Erie and Sandusky counties. He resigned in 1886, when he was elected a member of Congress from the Huron district. John M. Lemmon, of Sandusky county, was, by the governor, appointed to fill the vacancy until the election of 1887, at which time John L. Greene, of Sandusky county, was chosen for the place. In 1878 still another judge was provided for by statute, and William F. Lockwood was chosen. He served five years. At the election in 1883, George R. Haynes was declared elected, commissioned, and served about four months, when, on a contest, the Senate declared Louis H. Pike elected, and he served to the end of the term. Judge Haynes was the following year elected to the new Circuit Court, created by constitutional amendment, and has since been twice re- elected. At the November election, 1887, Judge Pike was a candidate for reelection, with Judge Pugsley as his chief opponent, when the latter was elected, for the term beginning November 6,. 1888. Judge Pugsley was reelected in 1892 for a term beginning November 4, 1893. Gilbert Harmon, of Toledo, additional judge under the act of March 24, 1869, was elected in 1888, and served a term of five years from October 28, 1889. Reuben C. Lemmon was re-elected and served until February 10, 1895, when he was succeeded by Judge Charles Pratt, of Toledo, who still occupies the Bench. Lindley W. Morris, of Toledo, additional judge, commissioned January 11, 1894, entered upon a term of five years in October of that year. Jason A. Barber, of Toledo, was elected in November, 1896, for a term of five years, beginning February 8, 1897.

I do not intend to write at length of the modern Bench and Bar. I have not space to write at any great length of the earlier members of either. They were, in greater part, men who came here from the East in search of the* El Dorado supposed to lie in the. vast wilderness of what was then known as "the far West." Educated in eastern schools of learning and morals, they were in the main ambitious, energetic, young, hopeful, vigorous, moral and intelligent men. The county was organized at a period of great speculation, nowhere more exciting and extravagant than on the Maumee. Money was poured into the valley by eastern capitalists to buy lands and lay out cities, until the banks of the river became to a great extent a line of towns " on paper." Speculation was at fever heat; prices were regulated only by the amount of advance over the last purchase which the owner would take ; and the lawyer was an essential and tolerably well paid adjunct of this condition of things. Benjamin F. Wade once told the writer that, coming from Cleveland to Toledo on a steamer, he found a man, also a passenger, who was on his way from Baltimore to Toledo to sell " River Tract No. 6." Wade's


solicitude was to get a contract out of him before the boat landed. Unable to get the seller to fix a price, he plumped an offer of $25,000 to him and closed the bargain to their mutual satisfaction, as the last price paid for it was in the neighborhood of $10,000 ; and Wade more than doubled his money. That tract of land was the subject of litigation for a good part of the time since and until about half a dozen years ago, when, it is to be hoped, the titles were settled forever. This period of speculation, fostered by the wild cat" banking system in vogue, begat an unhealthy credit system, which made the locality suffer in the succeeding panic that swept over the country; and the business of the lawyer and the dockets of the courts became greatly increased thereby. Many lawyers laid the foundations of considerable fortune during this early period, while some were lost in the financial wreck that followed.

A prominent judge of the Supreme Court used to say that it was a pleasure to preside over a District Court in Lucas county. The lawyers were better prepared, presented their cases better, and were more courteous and polite to each other and to the Bench, than those of any other county to which he was called. The example and influence of the prominent among the early lawyers have always been felt in the local Bar. Such men as Morton, Waite and' Hill could hardly fail to leave the impress of their character upon the future of the profession. Industry, study, thoroughness and honesty were the lessons taught, and their successors were apt at learning. The early lawyers, of course, had their peculiarities, weaknesses and failings, as have those who are now occupying their places. They were human, but good specimens of humanity. Judge Higgins was austere and seclusive while on the Bench, but impartial and sound. would reprimand a lawyer for trivial departure from the decorum which he exacted during the sessions of court, but would allow his own temper to lead him into absurd extravagances. Judge Bogen,. on the other hand, was as mild and even tempered a man as-ever Swore the ermine; and yet, firm and fearless in the administration of justice, in which he never lost his temper, and never carried the thinnest mark of severity. George B. Way would fill a court room with a flood of eloquence, carrying jurors and courts with his magic words, and then, as compensation, would desert his office and his law books and give himself entirely up to a luxurious indolence, or the pleasure of purely literary and artistic study. Morton, .with his magnificent physique, imposing height and appearance, his thorough knowledge of the law, and fluent and matchless address, was the most formidable opponent among the early lawyers. But he was wedded to politics. His great delight was in a political encounter, and he was ambitious to an extreme for political preferment. Hill possessed, more than most of men, the two qualities—intense industry and acuteness. His scent was as keen as a hunter's. His labor and toil in his cases were continuous, and, necessarily, his success was phenomenal. Outside his profession he had two hobbies, the public schools and the military. In the first he was very useful, and contributed much to the perfection off the matchless schools of Toledo. For the other


he was not particularly adapted, but freely gave his best ability to his country during the Rebellion as an adjutant-general of the State and in the field.

Andrew Coffinbury, who bore throughout his life the title of " Count," practiced law continuously from 1813 until his death, May 11, 1856. His sobriquet was first playfully given him by his associates at the Bar, because of a supposed resemblance to Count Puffendorf, a distinguished German jurist. The " Count" was among the early lawyers who " rode horseback" over the northwestern circuit from Mansfield, where he then lived, and was appointed prosecuting attorney at the term of court in the spring of 1836, held in Lucas county. He was a man of rare attainments, genial and affable at all times, and much beloved by his brethren. He moved to Perrysburg about 1839, and in 1841 entered into a partnership with his son, James M. Coffinbury, who opened the office for the firm's practice at Maumee City. James was elected prosecuting attorney for this county the same year, and held the office for several succeeding years. He moved to Findlay in 1845, and in connection with his practice, edited the Findlay Herald for about ten years. From there he went to Cleveland in 1855. He was severely injured in 1875 by his carriage being struck by a freight train, which resulted in the loss of one of his legs. He was nominated by the Democrats of Cuyahoga county several times for member of Congress and Common Pleas judge. In 1861 he was elected judge of the Court of Common Pleas, and held the office five years.

JOHN FITCH was born in Schodac, Rensselaer county, New York, February 16, 1806. His ancestors played an important part in American history by having descended from Thomas Fitch, Chief Justice and colonial governor of the colony of Connecticut under George III. His grandfather, Thomas Fitch, was a colonel in the Revolutionary army. He was admitted to the Bar in Albany, New York, after reading in the office of Thomas B. Ludlow of Nassau, in his native county, and of James Lynch, of New York City. In the fall of 1836 he moved to Toledo, and was elected prosecuting attorney the first term at which he appeared as a practitioner in our courts, a position which he held for a number of years. He was a terror to the criminal classes whom he was called to prosecute. A keen, skillful lawyer, he left no loopholes for escape. He rose rapidly to distinction at the Bar, mid in 1854 was elected judge of the Court of Common Pleas, taking his seat February 9, 1855, and was twice re-elected, retiring in 1870, after serving with distinction for fifteen years. Like his early associates, Judge Potter and Mr. Young, he lived to a ripe old age.

Of the Very earliest residents of Toledo, scarcely one attained to more honorable prominence than did George B. Way. Born in Baltimore, May 5, 1811, he attended both Yale College and Miami University, Ohio; was admitted to the Bar in 1832; opened an office at Urbana; and came to Toledo in 1835, at the solicitation of several parties interested in the place. Mr. Way, in 1836, took charge of a printing press and materials, which had been provided, and started a newspaper which was named the Toledo Blade, the first number of which was issued in the fall of 1836. At the same time he opened


an office for practice, which led to early success. During the first three years of the Blade, Toledo was the abode of several gentlemen of fine literary attainment, among them Joseph R. Williams and Pierre M. Irving, the latter a nephew of Washington Irving, who contributed to the columns of the newspaper. The credit of conferring the name upon the Blade was claimed for two parties —Mr. Way and Mr. Williams. A writer in Livingston's Law Journal in 1858, in a biographical sketch of Mr. Way, stated that he named the paper; while Mr. Williams, in an article in the Blade of October 17,1853, claimed such act as his. Soon after his arrival at Toledo Mr. Way formed a partnership with Richard Cooke, a young lawyer from Connecticut, who died in 1839, very highly respected. Mr. Way then entered into like connection with Daniel McBain, subsequently a resident of Chicago, which continued until Mr. Way left Toledo, in 1846. He had been the mayor and a councilman of the city. Going to Defiance, he became a partner with William Sheffield in practice. In the winter of 1847-8 he was elected president judge of Common Pleas. Court for the district, and continued as such until the office was abolished by the Constitution. of 1851.

In 1838, two young men came from Norwalk to Toledo, and in a card announced their intention there to practice law. They were John R. Osborn and Myron H. Tilden. The firm of Tilden & Osborn at once assumed a prominent place in the profession. Mr. Osborn, however, did not remain long here at that time. He had served as clerk of the Senate of the State for the session of 1837-8. In the fall of 1839 he returned to Norwalk. There he entered into a partnership with Courtland L. Latimer, under the firm name of Latimer & Osborn. Mr. Osborn was born at Circleville, Ohio, April 1,1813.. He was the eldest son of Ralph Osborn, who was auditor of State from 1816 to 1833, and quite prominent in State affairs at that period. He was graduated at the Ohio University at Athens in the fall of 1831, and entered the law department of Transylvania University, at Lexington, Kentucky. He was also a member of the first class of the law school at Cincinnati, under the instruction of Judge John C. Wright and Timothy Walker; was admitted to the Bar at a term of the Supreme Court held in Jackson county, in April, 1834. He moved to Norwalk in the fall of 1835 and there formed a partnership with Orris Parish, then one of the prominent lawyers of Columbus. It was during this time that Mr. Parish and Judge Higgins got into a controversy that resulted in Parish's imprisonment. It arose in a criminal case, and during the day there was a continual friction between the judge and attorney. Just before the evening adjournment, Judge Higgins lost all control of himself and ordered Parish to be imprisoned over night in the county jail. The Bar sympathized with the attorney, and in procession marched with him to the jail, spending the night with him in high carnival, and in the morning forming an escort of honor back to the court. Mr. Osborn, as a Whig, took an active part in the Harrison campaign of 1840, was elected to the Senate from the district composed of Huron and Erie counties in 1844, and was elected prosecuting attorney of Huron county for successive terms of about seven years. He was a delegate


to the Republican National Convention of 1856, after which he returned• to Toledo, where he continued to practice. He was invited in 1854, by the syndicate organizing the Wabash Railway System, to take charge of the legal department of that system for the state of Ohio prepared the articles of incorporation, the first bonds and mortgage which were issued, and had charge of the legal business of the company until his death. From 1870 to 1879 he was in partnership with General Wager Swayne, the eldest son of the late Judge Noah H. Swayne, under the firm name of Osborn & Swayne, and in 1883 formed a partnership with his nephew, Alexander L. Smith, which continued to the end of his life. Judge Tilden was born in Central New York, August 15, 1814, and was the son of Dr. Myron W. Holmes, who died before the birth of the subject of this sketch. When three years of age the family came to Ohio, settling in Huron county, where he was adopted by Dr. Daniel Tilden, a pioneer physician, whose name was given him. He was educated at Norwalk Seminary, meantime devoting his spare moments to the reading of standard literature. In 1833 he entered the law office of Thaddeus B. Sturgis, then a leading lawyer of Norwalk, and completed his reading in the office of Judge Lane of the State Supreme Court. Mr. Tilden was admitted to the Bar in 1885. In 1833, in connection with John Kenman, he started a newspaper, the Western Intelligencer, at Norwalk, which was ere long removed to Milan. He commenced practice at Norwalk, with fair success, but seeking a larger field be removed to Toledo, where be formed the partnership with Mr. Osborn, which lasted one year. Soon thereafter C. W. Hill, and ere long Henry Bennett, became associated with Mr. Tilden. In 1839 Mr. Tilden was elected to the city council, and in 1840 as mayor, and re-elected in 1842, serving in the latter position for four years. In 1342 he was the Whig candidate for Congress, though, owing to a strong Democratic majority, he was not elected. In 1843 he was chosen president judge of the Common Pleas district, serving as such until his resignation in 1847. Soon after this, in order to protect his interests as a stockholder in the steamboat Indiana, he bought that craft and ran it for two seasons. Not long thereafter he resumed practice, with William Baker as partner. In 1850 he removed to Cincinnati, where he died in 1888.

In the fall of 1837 there appeared the professional card of Swayne & Benjamin I. Brown, who opened an office at Toledo. Swayne then lived at Columbus, and Brown, living in Toledo, attended to the Toledo business of the firm. Judge Swayne became interested largely in Toledo real estate, which he held for many years. As an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States he became known throughout the whole country as an able lawyer. an upright judge, and a man of sterling worth. Two of his sons, Noah H. Swayne, Jr., and Frank B. Swayne, are now practicing in Toledo, with success, and are both good lawyers and estimable gentlemen. His eldest son, General Wager Swayne, who also practiced in Toledo fora number of years, is now a member of the firm of Dillon & Swayne, New York City.

Caleb F. Abbott was one of the early settlers in Toledo. He came from Massachusetts, was a graduate of Harvard, and always prided himself on his


New England birth and education. He was a painstaking and industrious lawyer, an intense Whig, an ardent admirer of Henry Clay, and greatly in love with politics. In a convention to choose delegates to a State convention, the question arising as to the choice between Clay and Harrison for President, he exclaimed : " Who is this General Harrison ?" He became, however, a warm supporter of the General after his nomination. Mr. Abbott died in April, 1855.

At the time of the organization of the county Henry Bennett resided at Perrysburg, Wood county, but subsequently removed to Toledo and formed a partnership With Charles W. Hill, which lasted but a short time. He continued to practice for a number of years, but quit the profession some forty years since, devoting his time to other pursuits. He died in 1887. He had lived in retirement from active business for many years, enjoying a comfortable income. He was an amiable, even-tempered gentleman of the old school, at peace with the world and possessing the confidence of the community in an unusual degree.

Among the lawyers practicing here in 1854 was Judge Thomas M. Cooley, subsequently for so many years on the Bench of the Supreme Court of Mich_ igan, member of the faculty of the Law School of the University of Michigan, a member of the Inter-State Commerce Commission, and author of many valuable text-books in law. He was in 1854 the independent candidate for judge of Common Pleas, against John Fitch, candidate of the "Anti-Nebraska," since the Republican party, who was elected. Soon after that time, Mr. Cooley returned to Michigan.

Frederick A. Jones died in Toledo, February 8, 1873. He was born at Grafton, Lorain county, October 10, 1823 ; received his education at Norwalk, Oberlin and Granville; and was admitted to the Bar in 1849. For a time he taught school at Jackson, Mississippi, but soon returned to the North and practiced law at Granville until coming to Toledo, in 1853, where he continued his practice, having at different times M. 0. Higgins and J. M. Ritchie as partners. In 1860 he was elected Probate Judge, and was serving on his fourth term at the time of his death.

Charles E. Perigo was a native of Otsego county, New York, and came to Toledo in 1844, entering the law office of Hill & Bennett as a student, and became a member of the firm as soon as his term of study was completed, which position he held at the time of his death, from consumption, January 27, 1857, aged 33 years. He was a man of strict integrity, pure morals and correct habits.

I am unable to give a complete list of the lawyers who have practiced in the Lucas county Bar. At a meeting of the Bar held in November, 1851, to take action of a complimentary nature on the retirement of Judge E. B. Sadler, there were present thirty-one members. Twenty-six others were eithgr residents at the time or became such soon afterwards. Edward Bissell, Sr., took an active and prominent part in the earlier history of Toledo. His son, Edward, Jr., was educated at Yale College, and began the practice of law in


Toledo in 1849, after serving as a volunteer in the war with Mexico, 1846-48. He was for many years one of the leading and most successful lawyers at the Bar. His chief characteristic was the absolute thoroughness with which he prepared every case and every matter connected with his professional work. Ile was one of the thorough scholars connected with the profession. In 1864 he formed a partnership with William H. Gorrill, John H. Doyle and W. S. Thurstin, under the firm name of Bissell & Gorrill. The members of this firm have changed many times since. Mr. Gorrill died in California with consumption, in 1874. Judge Doyle left the firm and went on the Bench in 1879, but Mr. Bissell never would consent to have the firm name changed.

William H. Gorrill died at Oakland, California, in September, 1874, aged thirty-eight years. He was born at Bowling Green, Wood county, in 1836, where he was raised and received his education until his entrance at Michigan University, where he was graduated from the legal course in 1862. Locating in Toledo, he formed a partnership with Edward Bissell, Jr., and was soon on his way to permanent eminence and success at the Bar, when disease of a pulmonary character developed itself in increasing force. Hoping by such change of habit to stay the progress of the enemy, he sought exercise in trips on the lakes and rivers, on which occasions he corresponded freely and very acceptably for the Toledo Commercial. In 1869 he sought health in California, where he established the Pacific. Bridge Company. The change was successful in a business way and for a time promised confirmed improvement in health ; hut this was only temporary, as the result showed. He left a wife (a daughter of Judge Walker, of St. Clair, Michigan,) and one child. Few young men have entered active life with higher promise of both business success and personal honor and usefulness, than did Mr. Gorrill.

Henry S. Commager, of Toledo, died at Galveston, Texas, of yellow fever, August 14, 1867. He was there in the capacity of an internal revenue officer. He settled in Otsego, Wood county, in 1838, when quite young. and there was married with a daughter of David hedges. In 1841 he entered the office of Young & Waite, Maumee, as a student at law; was admitted to the Bar in 1842; commenced practice at Maumee; removed to Toledo in 1852, and was the Democratic candidate for Congress in 1854, his opponent being Richard Mott, the Anti-Nebraska or Republican candidate, who was elected. Mr. Commager was among the first citizens of Lucas county to volunteer for. the defense of the Union, in 1861, enlisting first as a private in the Fourteenth and subsequently in the Sixty-seventh Regiment, of which later he was major and lieutenant-colonel. Afterwards he was colonel of the One Hundred and Eighty-ninth Regiment. In 1866 he was again the Democratic candidate for Congress, when he ran 800 ahead of the party ticket, though not elected. He led the Sixty-seventh Regiment in the dreadful charge at Fort Wagner, Charleston Harbor, July, 1863, where he was severely wounded. As a citizen he had a large circle of friends. Judge David H. Commager, of Toledo, is his son.

Charles M. Dorr was among the earliest law students of Toledo, as he was for thirty-five years prominent in political and public affairs. He was born in


Hoosac, New York, in 1815, and settled in Toledo in 1838; read law with John Fitch ; was admitted to practice in 1839 ; elected to the city council in 1847, and again in 1849; elected mayor of the cityin 1851, '53, '55, '57, '65. He was a man of genial temperament and marked personal popularity, as indicated by the elective positions held by him. He died suddenly of apoplexy, April 20, 1870, aged 55 years. October 5, 1841, he was married at Toledo, with Miss Caroline Hertzler, and reared a family of five children.

James M. Whitney died at Toledo, February 7, 1874. Born in Salem, Washington county, New York, November 9, 1802, he was married in 1829, with Lovinia Remell, who died April 5, 1862. February 8, 1863, he was married with Imogene Nicholas, at Mt. Vernon, Ohio, who with one child survives him. With his father-in-law, Mr. Whitney came to Toledo in 1831, and built a log house near what is now the corner of Bancroft and Fulton streets. He subsequently practiced law, and, about 1854, engaged in the hardware trade. He was one of the first justices of the peace in the county, holding the position for several years. He was a man of genial disposition and had many friends.

James M. Ritchie was born in Dunfermline, Scotland, July 28, 1829, and came with his parents to the United States in 1832. In 1852 he moved to Lorain county, Ohio, and there taught school. He was elected justice of the peace in 1854 on the " Anti-Nebraska" issue, and commenced the study of the law, and In 1857 was admitted to the Bar in Lucas county, and permanently settled in Toledo in September, 1858. He was elected judge of the Police Court in 1867, and after holding the office for about a year and a half resigned to resume the practice. He was a delegate to the Republican National Convention in 1880 that nominated Garfield for President, and in the fall of that year was nominated for Congress and elected, serving as a member of the 47th Congress. He is a thorough student, a lover of books, and an orator of considerable polish and power. In criminal cases he has been unusually successful.

Charles Kent was in active practice from 1850 until his death in 1892, during the later years in partnership with his son, Charles E. Kent. The old firm of Bassett & Kent was long a leading one in the profession. It was succeeded by Kent & Newton, and later by Kent, Newton & Pugsley, and commanded more than the average business and confidence. Mr. Kent bore the reputation for a quarter of a century of being one of the ablest lawyers of the Toledo Bar. His first partner here was Edward P. Bassett, whose impaired hearing and feeble health compelled him to abandon active duties long before his death. John T. Newton, for many years his successor in the firm,

before retiring from the practice accumulated an ample fortune, whose management occupied his later years.. The other member of the firm, Judge Isaac P. Pugsley, was appointed judge upon the elevation of Judge Doyle to the Supreme Court, and was, at the election in November, 1887, chosen as judge of the Common Pleas Court for five years, to succeed Judge Pike.

Judge Joshua R. Seney, who served part of a term as judge of the Court of Common Pleas, and resigned to resumes the practice which he preferred; was



a native of Seneca county, and came to Toledo in 1864. He has been and still is a prominent member of the Bar, and an affable and courteous gentleman.

Judge William A. Collins was in active and general practice for many years, always enjoying the confidence of his brethren and clients. He was an incorruptible and learned judge, and distinguished for his ability and integrity as a lawyer.

Charles H. Scribner was a leading lawyer in Knox county for twenty years before removing to Toledo, in 1869. [Has a separate biographical sketch.--Editor.]

It would be a pleasure to continue these sketches of the brethren of the Bar, but the limited space allotted to this article forbids. Several of the leading lawyers have extended notices elsewhere, and many others are no less entitled to distinction as lawyers of ability and honor than those already noticed.


The first term of the Supreme Court in Lucas county at which material business was transacted was in 1838. There was, however, a short term at which some formal matters were transacted held in July, 18.37, presided over by Judges Ebenezer Lane and Reuben Wood; in 1838 the court was held by Judges Lane and Grimke; in 1839, by Lane and Wood; in 1840, by Wood and Peter Hitchcock; in 1841 and 1842, no session of this court was held in this county; in 1843, it was held by Wood and Matthew Burchard; in 1844, by Wood and Nathaniel C. Reed; in 1845 and 1846, by Wood and Burchard; in 1847 and 1848, by Burchard and Edward Avery; in 1849. by Hitchcock and William 13. Caldwell; in 1850, by Hitchcock and Rufus P. Spaulding; and in 1851, by Hitchcock and Caldwell.

The new State Constitution went into effect in 1851, and the District Court was created which took the place of the old County Supreme Court. The District Court was held during the thirty-two years of its existence by the following named judges, to wit: Samuel Humphreyville, Lucius B. Otis, _____ Starkweather, Horace Foote, John Fitch, Thomas Bolton, James S. Carpenter, Jesse P. Bishop, Sebastian F. Taylor, Samuel T. Worcester, John L. Greene, James M. Coffin bury, Stevenson Burke, Samuel B. Prentiss, Walter F. Stone, W. W. Boynton, Charles E. Pennewell, Samuel W. McClure, Robert F. Payne, Darius Caldwell, J. M. Jones, Jesse H. McMath, G. M. Barber, E. T. Hamilton, S. E. Williamson, Henry McKinney, J. E. Ingersoll, John W. Heisley. The judges of the Supreme Court who sat with the District judges at various times from 1852 down to 1884, when the Circuit Court was organized, were Thomas W. Bartley, Jacob Brinkerhoff, Milton Sutliff, Josiah Scott, William White, Luther Day and John Welch.

By an amendment to the Constitution, adopted in 1884, a Circuit Court was created, which commenced in February, 1885, when Judges William H. Upson, Charles C. Baldwin and George R. Haynes were elected, for a term of


five years. Lucas county is in the Sixth Circuit, and two terms of the court are held annually in each county of the circuit. [The history of this court is published in another article.—Editor.]

There were twenty-seven Common Pleas Judges elected in 1851, under the Constitution which then went into effect. Of these it.is believed that the following only are now living: Judges Warden and Whitman, both of whom are ex-judges of the Supreme Court of Ohio ; Judge Bates, of the Columbus District ; Judge Otis, of the Toledo District, and Judge Welker. Judge Horace Foote, of Cleveland, held District Court in Lucas county in sixteen different years; and there was not a term of the District Court in this county omitted during the existence of that court.


By Act of Congress, passed February 10, 1855, the State of Ohio was divided into two Judicial Districts—the Northern, with the courts of Cleveland ; and the Southern, with the courts of Cincinnati. In July, 1870, an Act was passed providing for the holding of two terms of the District Court at Toledo, annually, at such times as the district judge should fix, but giving to it no term of the Circuit Court. Judge Charles T. Sherman was then the judge, and held several terms of the District Court here. In 1873 he resigned, and Martin Welker was appointed to succeed him by President Grant, ou the 28th of November, 1873. Judge Welker held his first term at Toledo in December of that year, and with three terms at Cleveland and two at Toledo annually, never missed holding his court until his retirement on account of age limit, in January, 1890.

Augustus J. Rix was appointed to succeed him as district judge, January 16, 1890, and has since filled the office. He is a lawyer of deep learning and a judge of high character.

On the 8th of June, 1878, by Act of Congress, the Northern District of Ohio was divided into the Eastern and Western Subdivisions, the Western Division consisting of Lucas, Williams, Defiance, Paulding, Van Wert, Mercer, Auglaize, Allen, Putnam, Henry, Fulton, Wood, Hancock, Hardin, Logan, Union, Delaware, Marion, Wyandot, Seneca, Sandusky, Ottawa, Erie and Huron counties. The Act required all suits of a local nature in the Circuit and District Courts against a single defendant, resident of the State, to be brought in the subdivision in which he should reside; and where there were two or more defendants, residing in different divisions, permitting the action to be . brought in either of these. It made all offenses cognizable and indictable in the division where committed, and required all jurors to be residents thereof. This Act made Toledo a judicial center for the territory embraced in the subdivision. The business of the court has been very important, and has brought to our city many of the leading lawyers of the country. During the period covered by the sessions of the court at Toledo, the railroads of the country


have furnished an important part of its work. Foreclosures of mortgages, administration of railroad properties by the instrumentality of receivers, and the sale of the property, have been a part of the work of nearly every term. The Toledo, Cincinnati & St. Louis, the Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific, the Ohio Central, the Michigan & Ohio, the Toledo & Indianapolis, and its successor, the Toledo, Columbus & Southern, are among the railroad companies that have furnished such litigation in the Western Division, and have furnished a large and lucrative business to the legal profession. Two terms of the District and Circuit Courts are held annually at Toledo (in June and December), each lasting six to eight weeks of active work.

At the time of the organization of the Western Division, Judge H. H. Emmons, of Detroit, was the judge of the circuit comprising the States of Ohio. Michigan. Kentucky and Tennessee, but Judge Emmons never presided at Toledo. He was succeeded by Judge John Baxter, of Knoxville, Tennessee, a man of immense energy, indomitable will and remarkable ability. He was somewhat a terror to the Bar until he became known and his methods understood. He would dispose of a case in the most arbitrary manner, without hearing counsel, and often without hearing the evidence beyond a point which he thought decisive. He was no respecter of persons. The most distinguished member of the Bar had no greater consideration shown him than the humblest and least known. He grew on the profession. As they came to recognize his wonderful perception, his impatience at the " law's delays," and the consumption of time by attorneys which he deemed unnecessary, his absolute .impartiality and integrity, the lawyers fell into his way of disposing of business contentedly after the first few years, and the remark would be often made, " He shoots quick but very straight." Off the Bench he was genial, kind and sociable, an entertaining talker and fond of his brethren and their company. During the war Judge Baxter was an uncompromising and fearless friend of the Union, and showed it in many ways that exhibited his nerve and unconquerable will in a place where it was not free from danger. He died at Hot Springs, Arkansas, in 1886, and was succeeded by Judge Howell E. Jackson, of Nashville, Tennessee, who was tendered a complimentary banquet by the Bar of Toledo on his arrival here, at which Judge Doyle presided and which was largely attended. Judge Jackson won his way quickly to the confidence of the Bar and was distinguished for his courtesy, his scholarship in the law, and the patient hearing he gave to every case. He was appointed a justice of the Supreme Court of the United States by President Harrison in 1893 and won the fullest confidence and the highest esteem of his colleagues in that great tribunal during the two years he was permitted to sit with them. He died in 1895. [Adapted from Munsell & Company's History of Toledo and Lucas County, and revised.]




In 181'7, then at the age of seventeen years, having just completed a fair academical education, on the advice of my elder brother, the late Hosmer Curtis, then a practicing lawyer at Mount Vernon, I left our home farm in Licking county, and accepted an appointment of deputy clerk in the Supreme and Common Pleas Courts of Knox county, and for more than three years principally discharged all the duties of those offices. My subsequent course of study was under my brother above named, and I was examined personally by Judges Hitchcock and Pease, at Newark, and admitted to the several degrees of our profession on the ninth of December, 1822.

The judges of the Supreme Court, at the early period to which I have referred, were Peter Hitchcock, Calvin Pease, Jacob Burnet and Joshua Collett. Each had peculiar and distinctive characteristics. Hitchcock and Burnet were, perhaps, most profound in knowledge of the law, the former of clear perceptions of the justice and equity of the side his convictions led him to espouse, unbending and unconciliatory. Hence he was generally regarded as pretty hard on young lawyers. On the other hand, Judge Burnet, with equal learning and discriminating powers in the legal questions presented for his consideration and decision, commended himself to the Bar generally for his amiable and courteous manners, and especially to young members, for whose embarrassment in their early efforts he was ever more considerate. Judge Pease was of most jovial temperament, of ready wit, and enjoyed a joke in delivering an opinion from the Bench, or from the forum. Following the judges above named were Justices Sherman, Wright, Lane, Wood, Spalding, and others, whose services seem to me so recent that their characteristics and generous qualities are yet well known and remembered by most of my legal brethren of the present day, and need not be further mentioned.

There was a class of lawyers in central Ohio, belonging to the period of 1810 to 1820, whose names should be mentioned, but who, from age, retirement or removal, had ceased to practice in this part of Ohio at the period to which my sketches are intended to apply. I refer to Philemon Beecher, of Lancaster ; Granger, of Zanesville; Edward Herrick and Jeremiah Munson, of Newark, and others.

- 62 -


My early practice was chiefly limited to the counties of Knox, Licking and Richland ; later, embracing other and adjacent counties. It was the custom to follow the courts in their terms, for the several counties of their circuit; so that, substantially, the same Bar would be in attendance, at courts distant from others fifty to one hundred miles. We traveled on horseback, over very bad roads, sometimes mid-leg deep of mud, or underlaid with the traditional "corduroy bridge." Our personal riding gear, the saddlebags stuffed with a few changes of lighter apparel, often our law books; our legs protected by " spatter dashes," more commonly called " leggins," and our whole persons covered with a camlet, or Scotch plaid cloak ; we were prepared to meet whatever weather befell us.

The lawyers in pretty constant attendance at the courts of the three counties above named were Wm. M. Irwin, Thomas Ewing and Charles R. Sherman, of Lancaster; S. W. Culbertson, Wyllis Sillimun, Samuel Herrick, Alexander Harper and Charles B. Goddard, of Zanesville; William Stanbery, of Newark ; Samuel Mott and Hosmer Curtis, of Mt. Vernon. A little later came into the profession a younger class who followed the same mode of practice as their seniors. Among these were Henry Stanbery and H. H. Hunter, of Lancaster; Richard Stilwell, George James and David Spangler, of Zanesville; Joshua Mathiott, C. W. Searles, James R. Stanbery, George B, Smythe, H. D. Sprague and S. D. King, of Newark ; the writer and John W. Warden, Ben. S. Brown, C. Delano, John K. Miller and J. C. Hall, of Mt. Vernon ; John M. May, Andrew Coffinberry, Jacob Parker, James Purdy, James Stewart and Wm. McLaughlin, of Mansfield. And in this connection should also be mentioned Edward Avery, Levi Cox, John A. Holland, Samuel R. Curtis and Ezra Dean, of Wooster, and Orris Parrish, of Columbus.. The Bars of these several counties, and especially all the members of our profession above named, more or less generally, but in some counties more than others, met at the different courts and participated in the local retainers and forensic contests of the term.

It must not be supposed that because of the rude and primitive character of the civilization of the period, and organization and conduct of the courts, there was any less legal learning or talent on the Bench or at the Bar than the present period gives. On the contrary, there were among those mentioned. giants of intellect, men of profound learning in the principles of the common law, of great power in oratory, and discriminating legal acumen. Many of the older class of the profession had received their education in the eastern schools of learning, and brought with them to our then young State abilities which had been cultivated under more favored opportunities in the East. Our libraries were small and made up chiefly of English authorities, and our practice and system of pleadings conformed to the common-law rules and precedents.

It may well be supposed that meeting together at some favorite "tavern" (such was the name in those days), the genial members of the profession, coming from different counties, would be likely to greet each other with more


than ordinary warmth and delight. The old " Black Horse," at Newark, kept' by that most obliging host, John Cully ; the taverns at Mt. Vernon, kept severally by General Joe Brown and J. B. Plummer, and the old hostelries of John Williams and Mrs. Henderson, at Mansfield, would testify to many gay and happy evenings of social recreation and enjoyment. We were generally thrown together in one common, large sitting-room, and frequently, in a large degree, in a like sleeping-room. Thus conversations and amusements would become common through the whole circle. The profession was rather exclusive, and generally protected by the kind landlord from outside intrusion. Hence, returning to our hotel after the quarrels and contests of the court room, and refreshed by a supper now not often seen, we gathered in our big parlor, perhaps around .a large, brightly-burning log fire, and were ready for anecdotes, jokes and songs, as the evening and the spirits of the 'party might invite.

It would be a mistake to suppose that these convivial scenes were inspired by drinking. It is true that to take a cocktail or other glass of liquor was not in those days regarded as evidence of inebriety ; yet in all these times of which I speak, with one single unhappy exception, I cannot recall a single instance of drunkenness on these occasions, or excess of indulgence in that vice. At Mount Vernon and Mansfield, songs and stories predominating, Spangler, Goddard and others would hold the older members spellbound with their fine voices in Tom Moore's Melodies, or Orris Parrish wake the echoes, with a chorus from all the voices, in,

"The Assyrian came down like a wolf on the fold

And his cohorts were gleaming with purple and gold,"

and other like exhilarating songs.

Speaking of Parrish, I may remark that he was a man of a high order of forensic oratory; more distinguished as a jury lawyer than on a demurrer. In his bursts of eloquence and fervid declamation, he would hold in most earnest attention, the jury and audience; and woe be to the party against whom he permitted the freedom of his abuse. In one instance at the Mansfield court, when he had the closing speech for a young female client, in a slander case, and his vials of wrath against the defendant being full to overflowing, as his turn approached, he privately requested the presiding judge (we then had associates), on some excuse to leave the bench when he would get into the warmth of his speech. The judge, smiling quietly, assented and, at the proper time, retired from the bench, leaving, for a few moments, the unlearned associates to preside over the proceedings. Parrish took his opportunity, and drawing from his pocket a small pistol as evidence of his ability to defend himself from any personal assault he might provoke from the sturdy defendant sitting in front of him, he turned from the jury and apostrophized the defendant, addressing him by name and pouring down upon his head and shamed face the most denunciatory anathemas and personal abuse his fertile mind could invent, or the free vocabulary of the English language admit of. This episode was about disposed of when the judge resumed his seat, and the


orator closed his speech with one of his grand and felicitous perorations. Lane, J., gave the law of the case to the jury, who, after a short deliberation, returned with a verdict of exemplary damages for the plaintiff.

On one occasion, a little before my admission to the bar, on a cold day in May, in which snow and rain contested for predominance, I accompanied the party of lawyers on their way to the Norwalk court. There were present of the party, Charles R. Sherman, William Stanbery, Hosmer Curtis and Samuel Mott. We made Trucksville, a small hamlet twelve miles north of Mansfield, the first day. The little log tavern looked dreary and inhospitable, and we were all very wet and cold. There was a large fireplace in a back sitting room and a pile of wood near the front door. Some of the party seized the axe, and lustily applied themselves to cutting the sticks to suitable lengths and others carrying in and building a roaring fire. It will be remembered by some of the older members of the association that Judge Sherman, who was ever the life and animation of whatever company he fell into, had, comparatively, a very long nose. It happened that a stranger guest, who had arrived a little before us, had a like facial characteristic. In the process of passing out, and in the cheerful labor of building the fire, the two met in the doorway. The stranger, instantly seizing his own nose and turning it to one side, said: "Now you can pass!" None enjoyed the wit of the joke better than Sherman himself. In our journeying the following day, Mott's horse got his foot fast in a corduroy," and, falling, tumbled the redoubtable "Colonel" his full length into the cold, slimy and stagnant water. Completely soaked, he was obliged to stop at a cabin on the wayside to dry off. At Norwalk there was no tavern. We found stables for our horses and a lunch at a rustic table under a temporary shed, improvised for the accommodation of persons attending court from the surrounding country. The court was the first held in Norwalk, then lately chosen as the spot for the county seat. Two Indians were indicted, at this first term, for robbing and killing an old man of the name of Spicer, in the western part of the county's jurisdiction, then extending to the State line. I well remember the stolidity that sat upon the faces of the Indians as Lane, then prosecuting attorney of the county, read the several formal counts of the long indictment, and the same were interpreted to them. They were afterwards convicted and hung.

Judge Tod, father of our late war governor, was the presiding judge of the court—a most genial and hilarious gentleman of the old school. At the adjournment of the court the judge, and all the foreign members of the Bar, walked about two miles to the comfortable farm-house and home of the Underhills, who hospitably opened their house for the accommodation of " the court "—which phrase was always understood to include the lawyers. Whit-tlesey, Lee, Foote and others, from Cleveland, or other parts of the "Reserve," Cooke from Sandusky City (" Ogontz"), and some others added to our party, filled the old double-log farm-house pretty full. Beds were improvised on the floor, and with big log fires, our comfort was very well assured. The evenings were spent in characteristic jovial style. To add to the variety a " charge "


was made against Chief Justice " Lee" (as he was called, for almost all the lawyers had a title), and a court was organized for his trial. After hearing the charge and evidence, and sundry arguments of counsel full of wit and fun, the court held the unlucky defendant guilty and assessed the grog against him for the next day.

At the organization of the circuit embracing the counties of Muskingum, Licking, Knox, etc., William Wilson, of Newark, *was appointed presiding judge, and continued upon the bench till about 1824 or '5, when he was succeeded by Alexander Harper, of Zanesville; later, Ezra Dean, of Wooster; Jacob Parker, of Mansfield, and others. On one occasion, at the Newark court, two negroes had been indicted for stealing articles from a clothes line. Searle and the writer, then youngest of the Bar, were appointed to defend them. We did what we could before the jury, but they were found guilty: Our chief ambition was to beat Judge Wilson, who, after succession of Harper, had been appointed prosecuting attorney, and against whom we young lawyers had a good many sores for rough slaps from him, while on the Bench. We carefully examined the indictment and found a flaw, and full of glee at the hope of beating the "old judge," we repaired late to the " potter's field " bedchamber at Cully's, in which common jokes and conversation from bed to bed were yet being indulged; and on our coming in, turned upon our defense of the negroes, and in which we mentioned our intention to move in arrest of judgment.

"Ah," said Judge Harper from his roost, " but you will be too late; no notice of the motion was given, and the rules require that such notice shall be entered the same day the verdict is rendered. " Is that so?" said one of us, "then we will mend that." Thereupon Searle and his colleague sprang out of bed, then eleven o'clock, and found the clerk still at his books in the. court room, with whom we at once filed our motion in due form. The following day when the case was called we presented our motion and showed the omission in the indictment of the word "feloniously," and supported our motion by cases cited from English decisions, where the omission of the word " burglariously " had been held fatal. The old judge was not very good on legal points and but feebly answered our arguments. The court sustained our motion, and the negroes being present, getting the intimation they were free, made a hasty retreat. It was a small thing, but broke the old judge down as public prosecutor.

I was present at the great trial of Jacob Shafer in the Licking Common Pleas in 1824. The defendant was a man of considerable wealth and of good respectability. He had objected to his neighbor erecting a party fence, claiming that, as being set, it invaded his premises, and to enforce his objections brought a gun with him. Words and acts followed, and he shot the man. Shafer was indicted for murder. The counsel employed for the defense were William Stanbery, Thomas Ewing and Philemon Beecher, than whom no abler lawyers could probably have been selected in the State. They were giants at the Bar. The case occupied many days, and the arguments for the defense were submitted in the following order : Ewing summed up the evidence in detail,


and in the most clear and logical manner so presented all the facts as to enforce his deductions with greatest power. He was followed by Stanbery, who dwelt wholly upon the law of the case, and, in an able speech, distinguished for its force and authority, asserted the justification of the defendant in the act committed; or, at least his innocency of the crime of murder. General Beecher closed the arguments for the defense by a masterly and eloquent speech, in which he dwelt wholly upon the motives of human actions, deducing from the philosophy of the case, and its moral principles, the utter absence of intent on the part of the defendant to commit crime. The defendant was convicted of man-slaughter. The case was distinguised chiefly for the extraordinary talent it called forth in the defense. At that time Mr. Ewing was just rising in eminence, and his able speech in this case in a great degree fixed his high position at the Bar.

The appointment by the legislature of Charles R. Sherman to the Supreme Bench was an event hailed by the Bar of central Ohio with great delight. Few lawyers were ever more beloved by their brethren. His remarkably genial, social temperament, united with a fine voice and a happy talent of speech, had won him an enviable position at the Bar, and but for his early death, which occurred in 1829, he would have become equally distinguished as a jurist.

About the same time, perhaps by the same legislature which elevated Sherman to the Bench, Thomas Ewing was elected to the United States Senate. How we missed his genial face and noble bearing in all our social Bar meetings ! Or more especially in the contests and ring of battle in the Common Pleas Courts! In the meantime Henry Stanbery and Hocking Hunter had grown into power ; the one as the most accomplished lawyer, at all points, of the age ; the other, solid, logical, true. These, for a series of years, attended our courts, and, until their. high reputations drifted them into wider fields, were regarded as of the local Bar of these central counties.

At one of the early terms of court at Mount Vernon, after Ewing had taken his seat in the Senate, in one of our usual hilarious gatherings on the coming together of the scattered members of the Bar of our circuit, the conversation naturally turned on Ewing, whose absence alone was sufficient to make him conspicuous to our minds. Some one said : " We must write him a letter." Another said : " Let it be in rhyme, and set Dave Spangler at it." " Very well," said Spangler; " I will try my hand, and the rest of you must help." And so Spangler, the following morning, produced his letter, with sundry additions contributed by Goddard and others, and being signed by all the members of the Bar present, it was sent to our honorable senator, in token of our common remembrance of him.

At one of our terms in Knox county, during the presidency of Ezra Dean, a man of the name of Houston was indicted for forgery. Delano was then public prosecutor, and Brown and the undersigned engaged for the defense. The defendant was a reputable farmer, against whom no suspicion of crime had ever before been entertained. We made a sturdy defense, but the proofs of guilt were very strong and made it


uphill work for us. Our points of defense were, doubts as to the falsity of the paper, and the good character of the defendant. The trial occupied several days, and a verdict of guilty was brought in late on Saturday. Judge Dean was a man of more than ordinary ability, and of high moral sense, but on the Bench was noted for severe and incourteous manners toward the Bar. His rulings were usually pronounced in an imperious tone. Counsel for defendant, in this case, gave notice of motion for new trial. The judge was restive to pronounce the decision on our motion, and proceed to the sentence. Such we foresaw would be a long term in the penitentiary. Whatever might be the guilt of the defendant, we knew his condemnation would break the hearts of the members of his worthy and innocent family, aid our sympathy for them, as well as professional duty, impelled us to use all legal grounds by which we might hope to avert the blow. We urged a continuance, which the court refused to grant. We argued our motion for a new trial, which was overruled, with imputations that counsel were filibustering for. delay, and which were repelled with indignation. It was the last business day of the term, as the court should open on the following Monday in another county. It was already past ten o'clock. The court room was crowded with an interested audience. Counsel advised the court that we had a motion in arrest of judgment which we proposed to argue, and present numerous authorities, which could not be finished until some hours into Sunday. Therefore we again urged for a continuance, offering ample bail. The judge was inexorable and ordered us to proceed with the argument. Angry words ensued; allusions were made to the notorious Jeffreys, impatient for the blood of his victims, and with piles of law books before us, and an intimation that the church-going people of the following morning might stop at the court house to hear the conclusion of the case, counsel threw off their overcoats and commenced their argument. On the Bench, in the persons of the associates, were one Methodist preacher and one Presbyterian elder, who had conscientious scruples against the desecration of the Sabbath; and, seeing the way the cat was going to jump, asserted their authority, overruled the president judge, and ordered the case continued, fixing the bail at $800.00, which was promptly given, and the court adjourned a few minutes before the advent of Sunday. I need hardly add that our client forfeited his recognizance and moved "to the West." The question naturally arises, " Why were not counsel ordered in arrest for contempt?" The answer is, we knew the associates would not permit it.

On the fiftieth anniversary of my admission to the Bar, December 9, 1872, I gave a reception and supper to my brethren, and announced my retirement from the further active duties and responsibilities of the profession. Since when, except as " jurist consult" for old friends, have given office and legal services only to my own business. 

But I love my profession, and regard it as one in which we can do more good to our fellow-men than in any other. And though no longer accepting retainers, I claim the honors of my commission equally as in "ye olden times." [Mr. Curtis died November 5, 1885.]


At an early period in the history of Cincinnati the want of a special court for the disposition of commercial and other business incident to a large mercantile and manufacturing community made itself felt. A court consisting of a single judge and called the Superior Court of Cincinnati was created in the year 1838 and continued to exist down to the time of the adoption of the present Constitution of Ohio in 1851. The judges who successively occupied the Bench of that court were, David K. Este, Charles D. Coffin, William Johnston, Charles P. James and George Hoadly.

After the adoption of the Constitution the same feeling which had brought the old Superior Court into existence led to the creation of the present Superior Court of Cincinnati, the Act providing for which is dated April 7, 1854. The territorial jurisdiction of the court was confined to the city boundaries, and its jurisdiction in other respects was limited so as to exclude criminal, divorce, and other similar business, as well as minor cases coming up on appeal from justices of the peace. The object for which the court was created was to dispose of civil controversies of the larger sort concerning rights of person and property, and, on the whole, after an active existence of more than forty years, it seems to have justified the expectations of its founders.

The organization of the new court is said to have been modeled upon that of the King's Bench. It consisted, and still consists, of three judges, each of whom ordinarily sits in separate session, " Special Term," for the hearing and determination of causes both legal and equitable, and with or without a jury. Each judge has the power to reserve questions that may arise before him to the full Bench in "General Term," where they are heard and decided by all of the judges sitting together. Any party dissatisfied with the judgment of the Special Term is authorized to carry the case by proceedings in error to the General Term for the purpose of reversing the judgment if he can, and the judgments of the General Term are in like manner reviewable by the Supreme Court of Ohio.

As it was originally organized the Superior Court remains to-day, except that an obvious defect in its organization has been removed by the provision that the judge who decides any case at Special Term shall not sit in review of the same case in General Term, and in order that there may be a full Bench in each case, an Act has been recently passed, providing that the presiding judge of the Court of Common Pleas shall sit with the judges of the Superior Court in General Term for the purpose of deciding cases coming up on error.

- 69 -


The first election of judges was held on the first Monday of May, 1854, and resulted in the choice of William Y. Gholson, Oliver M. Spencer and Bellamy Storer. By classification by lot among themselves, Judge Gholson received a commission for a full term of five years, Judge Spencer for a term of four years, and Judge Storer for three years. The first term of the Court began under auspicious circumstances. The three judges who then qualified and took their seats on the Bench were lawyers of much more than ordinary reputation and capacity. An event rare in the history of the American judiciary occurred : the leaders of the Bar gave up practice and consented to take seats upon the Bench. The firm of Storer & Spencer had long occupied a leading place and enjoyed a lucrative practice at the Cincinnati Bar, and William Y. Gholson had achieved a professional reputation hardly second to any lawyer in the State. A Virginian by birth and a graduate of Princeton, Judge Gholson had practiced for a time in the State of Mississippi, but came to Cincinnati while yet a young man. His keen logical intellect, joined to his power of accurate statement, soon made his influence felt at the Bar, and it was not long before he had gathered around him a profitable clientage.

Judge Spencer has been said to have had a genius for the law, and especially for the judicial field. All his contemporaries speak of him in terms of admiration and enthusiasm. He is said to have been especially broad-minded, equitable and considerate, as well as deeply read in the law, and possessed of acute powers of discrimination. He was a native of Cincinnati, his ancestors having been among the first settlers, and one of them is said to have been captured by the Indians in one of their raids upon the infant settlement. Judge Spencer was re-elected a judge of the Superior Court in the year 1859 and died in office in 1861.

Perhaps no man ever sat on the Bench in Hamilton county who made a deeper impression than Bellamy Storer. His long term of service on the Bench, nearly eighteen years, combined with his mental and physical vigor, made him known to the people and the Bar as few other judges have been. Though he has been dead these twenty-five years, there are yet households in Cincinnati where his name is spoken with awe as that of the first of judges. Judge Storer graduated at Bowdoin College and came to Cincinnati in the year 1817, and it is said that the day of his advent was made noteworthy by a physical encounter which he had with an individual who sought to put a slight upon him. Certain it is, that he remained a bold and aggressive opponent to all who encountered him at the Bar. His impetuous temper made him a terror to the foe, as did also his great knowledge of the law, his tenacious memory, and his skill in the application of legal principles to the facts of a case. Coming to the Bench in the maturity of his powers, and after a long and varied experience at the Bar, he was prepared to and did render great service, especially in the disposition of the miscellaneous questions that arise in a busy nisi prius court. He was four times elected to the position, and, resigning his office January 1, 1872, died soon afterwards.


The first of the three original judges to leave the Bench was Judge Gholson, who took his departure at the end of his first term of five years. He afterwards served a term as a judge of the Supreme Court of Ohio, and it is Int just to say that his reported decisions rank with the best opinions published by that court. Judge Gholson afterwards returned to the practice, in which he continued with much success to the time of his death.

Judge Gholson was immediately succeeded by another famous lawyer, George Hoadly, who, after serving out his term of office in 1864, returned to the Bar and achieved great success. He appeared as one of the counsel for Samuel J. Tilden before the Electoral Commission created by Act of Congress to determine the contested presidential election of 1876. Judge Hoadly was afterwards elected governor of Ohio, and some years later removed to New York City, where he is now one of the leaders of the Bar.

In 1864 Alphonso Taft was chosen by the people to succeed Judge Hoadly on the Bench of the Superior Court, and he too brought to the discharge of his duties qualities of the highest order. lie seemed to have been formed by nature to till a judicial position. Of broad, clear comprehension, deeply learned, painstaking and accurate, kindly and charitable, deliberate in speech and action, yet as firm as his native granite hills, he seemed to lack no quality necessary to the discharge of his duties in the most successful manner, and his career on the Bench justified this opinion. He served for about nine years in such a manner as to elicit only good words from the Bar and the public, and resigned January 1, 1872, at the same time as Judge Storer.

J. Bryant Walker, son of a distinguished father and a junior member of the Bar, of great promise. whose early death has been much lamented, was appointed to till the vacancy occasioned by Judge Taft's resignation, and held the place until the ensuing election, when Alfred Yaple was chosen by the people to the position.

Judge Yaple was a native of Ross county, Ohio, whence he came to Cincinnati at the close of the civil war to practice his profession. A great reader, with an excellent memory, he is said to have been a walking encyclopedia of legal knowledge; but lie was more than that; he was a good lawyer, having his learning so arranged and digested in his mind that he was able to apply it to a given case with great promptness. lie always had about him certain obvious marks of his rural origin, yet he had the profound respect of the community, which was shown in a striking manner in the year 1874, when lie was re-elected without opposition. The Republican party, to which he was opposed, paid him the compliment of declining to nominate a candidate against him. At the end of his term in 1879 he returned to the Bar, where he continued in practice until his death in the year 1893.

The regular election in 1879 designated as the successor of Judge Yaple a rising young man who has since acquired a national reputation. Joseph B. Foraker took his seat upon the Bench in that year and began the performance of his duties with characteristic energy. A graduate of Cornell, with a good deal of varied experience acquired during his practice at the Bar, he brought


to the Bench a strong sense of right, quick and clear perceptions, and strong reasoning powers. While in good health his service was very satisfactory to. the Bar; but the confinement of judicial life soon began to wear upon him and his health failed, so that he resigned his position in 1882 and returned to the more active life at the Bar, where he was speedily restored to health and strength. He has since served two terms as governor of Ohio and is now a member of the Senate of the United States, where he has fairly earned the applause of his party and the respect of his opponents.

The vacancy caused by Judge Foraker's resignation was filled by the appointment of William Worthington, who served very acceptably until the ensuing election.

Hiram D. Peck was chosen in 1883 for the residue of Judge Foraker's term, and took his seat upon the Bench. He was re-elected in 1884 and served out his term, ending in 1889, when, declining a renomination, he returned to the practice, and was succeeded by Governor Edward F. Noyes, who served until the following summer, when he suddenly died and John Riner Sayler was appointed to fill the vacancy until the next election (1891), when the present incumbent, Judge Rufus B. Smith, was chosen by the people. Judge Smith was re-elected in the year 1894, and continues to discharge the duties of the office to the great satisfaction of the profession.

The second vacancy on the Bench of the Superior Court was caused by the death of Judge Spencer in the year 1861, and it was filled by no less a personage than Stanley Matthews, of whom it is said that he was elected while serving in the army as a colonel of Ohio volunteers, and that he returned home to take his seat on the Bench. The short period which he served as a judge of the Superior Court was sufficient to indicate the high class of judicial work of which he was capable and his early resignation was a matter of general regret. Judge Matthews was afterwards elected to the Senate of the United States and subsequently appointed a justice of the Supreme Court. His distinguished services in both positions are matters of national history.

Charles Fox, a practitioner of many years' experience and much respected, succeeded Judge Matthews and served out one term, which expired in 1869. He afterwards returned to the Bar, and lived to be its senior member.

Judge M. B. Hagans was in 1869 elected to the position vacated by Judge Fox, and served until 1873, when he resigned to return to practice, from which he retired some years since.

The successor of Judge Hagans was Myron H. Tilden, celebrated for profound learning and for many years a professor in the Cincinnati Law School. He was especially noted for his knowledge of equity jurisprudence and procedure. He served until the year 1878, when he retired in broken health.

Judson Harmon, then in the flush of young manhood, succeeded to the office and continued on the Bench, rendering valuable service, until 1887, when he resigned to become the head of the firm which had theretofore been led by Judge Hoadly, who removed to New York. Judge Harmon was as success-


ful at the Bar as on the Bench, and was appointed attorney-general of the United States by President Cleveland during his second term.

William H. Taft was the successor of Judge Harmon on the Bench of the Superior Court, and continued thereon until the year 1890, when he resigned to accept the position of solicitor-general of the United States, from which he was further promoted to that of judge of the United States Circuit Court for the Sixth Circuit, which he continues to fill to the great satisfaction of the Bar and people of the circuit.

The vacancy caused by the resignation of Judge Taft was filled by the election of Samuel F. Hunt, whose popularity was further attested by his re-election in 1893 to the Bench of which he is one of the present incumbents.

The last of the three original judges of the Superior Court to leave the Bench was Judge Storer, who resigned January 1, 1872, after a continuous service of nearly eighteen years.

John L. Miner, an old and well known member of the Bar, and a former partner in practice with Judge Gholson, was appointed to and filled the vacancy until the next election, when Timothy A. O'Connor was elected by• the people and took his seat upon the Bench, where he remained until 1877, the expiration of his term. During a large part of his term of office Judge O'Connor was troubled by ill health.

Manning F. Force succeeded Judge O'Connor. He brought to the Bench a capacity, training and experience rarely combined in one person. A graduate of Harvard, he came to Cincinnati soon after leaving college and began the practice of law. At the outbreak of the civil war he entered the army and rapidly rose in rank until he attained that of major general. He participated in the Vicksburg and Atlanta campaigns and led his division on Sherman's march to the sea, besides seeing a good deal of other hard service. Ile was severely wounded at Atlanta, but returned to the army as soon as lie recovered, and remained with it until the close of the war. Soon after his return home he was elected a judge of the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton county, and continued on the Bench of that Court for a period of ten years. After a brief interval Judge Force was elected to the Superior Court, where he remained for two terms. He received the compliment of a unanimous re-election in 1882, the Democratic party declining to nominate a candidate against him. To the regret of the entire profession, Judge Force left the Bench in 1887 because of failing health. A few months at the Bar served to restore him to good condition, but he was not permitted to remain long in practice. At the earnest request of the board of trustees, of Governor Foraker, and many friends, he accepted the position of commandant of the Ohio Soldiers' and Sailors' Home, to which he was appointed in the year 1888 and where he has since been, rendering that careful, conscientious service for which he is noted.

Frederick W. Moore was elected to take the place vacated by Judge Force in 1887. Ile, too, had been a distinguished officer in the army during the civil war, rising to the position of colonel of the Eighty-first Ohio volunteers, and after the war was appointed to a position in the regular army, which he


subsequently resigned to return to the Bar. Prior to his election to the Superior Court he had served two terms as judge of the Court of Common Pleas. He was re-elected to the Superior Court in 1892, and retired at the end of his term in May of the present year, 1897, to be succeeded by William H. Jackson, son of the late Justice Jackson, of Tennessee, who comes to the Bench with a good training and from whom valuable service is expected.



William Y. Gholson, 1854-1859; George Hoadly, 1859-1864; Alphonso Taft, 1864-1872; J. Bryant Walker, 1872; Alfred Yaple, 1872-1879; Joseph B. Foraker, 1879-1882; William Worthington, 1882-1883 ; Hiram D. Peck, 1883-1889 ; Edward F. Noyes, 1889-1890 ; John Riner Sayler, 1890-1891; Rufus B. Smith, 1891 —.

Oliver M. Spencer, 1854-1861; Charles D. Coffin, 1861-1862; Stanley Matthews, 1862-1863 ; Charles Fox, 1863-1868 ; Marcellus B. Hagans, 18681873; Myron H. Tilden, 1873-1878; Judson Harmon, 1878-1887; William H. Taft, 1887-1890 ; Samuel F. Hunt, 1890

Bellamy Storer, 1854-1872 ; John L. Miner, 1872 ; Timothy A. O'Connor, 1872-1879 ; Manning F. Force, 1877-1887; Frederick W. Moore, 1887-1897 ; William H. Jackson, 1897 —.

As further showing the class of men who have occupied seats on the Bench of the Superior Court, it may be mentioned that the following positions have been filled by the judges named: 1 Justice U. S. Supreme Court—Matthews; 1 Major General U. S. Volunteers—Force; 1 Judge Supreme Court of Ohio—Gholson ; 3 Governors of Ohio—Hoadly, Foraker and Noyes; 2 U. S. Senators —Matthews and Foraker ; 2 U. S. Attorney-Generals—A. Taft and Harmon ; 1 Minister to Russia—Alphonso Taft; 1 Minister to France—Noyes; 1 U. S. Circuit Judge—W. H. Taft.

In addition to all of which several of the more recent incumbents claim to be still classified as young men, and, to live in hopes.

It may not be uninteresting to note that seventeen of the twenty-six judges who have occupied positions on the Bench of the Superior Court were men of collegiate education. Those from Harvard were Walker, Worthington, Force and Jackson ; from Yale, A. Taft, W. H. Taft and Smith ; from Princeton, Gholon ; from Miami, Sayler, Hunt and Peck ; from Bowdoin, Storer ; from Kenyon, Matthews; from Dennison, Harmon ; from Darmouth, Noyes ; from Western Reserve, Hoadly ; and from Cornell, Foraker.



THOMAS EWING (1789-1871). Thomas Ewing, commonly known as " The Elder," was born near West Liberty, Ohio county, Virginia, now in West Virginia, on December 28, 1789. His Ewing ancestors were Scotch-Irish. His great-grandfather, Thomas Ewing. emigrated from Londonderry and settled in Greenwich, New Jersey, in 1718. Mr. Ewing's parents were George Ewing and Rachel Harris. His father enlisted in the Second Jersey regiment in 1775, and served throughout the Revolutionary War, gaining a first-lieutenancy. He left an interesting journal, which includes an accouht of the winter spent by the army at Valley Forge. After the war he removed to Western Pennsylvania, and later to West Liberty, where he taught a school. In April, 1792, he settled with his family at Marietta, Ohio. In an autobiographical sketch, from which is taken much of what is here told, Mr. Ewing speaks of his father as of good English education, fine literary taste, and considerable reading for the time and country in which he lived and of his mother as a woman of good intellect, but of slender education. She was possessed of great energy and strength of character, as is shown in the following extract from the address delivered at the Marietta centennial celebration by Mr. Ewing's son, General Thomas Ewing. " I have a letter from a kinswoman," said he, "in Westfield, New Jersey, telling me of a trip made to. Cumberland county, in that State, in the year 1790, by a woman from the border of the Northwest Territory, who came there after a long absence on a last visit to her aged father and mother. She was the wife of a soldier of the Revolution, who emigrated to the far West after the war ended. She had made the journey from the Ohio over river and mountain, by flood and fell, through an almost trackless wilderness, on horseback, unattended, carrying a boy baby in her arms. No man ever boasted of his lineage with loftier pride than I, when I say that that brave and loving woman was my grandmother and the baby my father." Later the family removed with a few other families up the Muskingum river to the mouth of Olive Green creek, where they erected block houses and cabins. They had little but the bare necessaries of life. The autobiography says : "Salt was for a long time an unknown article. A party of soldiers once left us a very small quantity, and I remember the exquisite relish which it gave to our food." As a child Mr. Ewing saw a good deal of the Indians. Before the peace of 1795, the settlers were constantly threatened with raids. One of the neighbors was killed and scalped in the summer of 1794, and Mr. Ewing re-

- 75 -


membered seeing the body borne into camp. It realized the imagination with which children were frightened of " raw head and bloody bones." An incident of Mr. Ewing's early boyhood was preserved by a sister. The two, while playing in the woods, were chased by a bear. He told her to run home and waited until she got a considerable start before following. Though the bear nearly caught up with them, he maintained the distance which he had set between himself and her. They reached home in safety after a terrifying chase; and their brother George killed the bear. Before Mr. Ewing was six years old his eldest sister taught him to read.. He has noted an interesting mental phenomenon, viz., that in after life he remembered verbatim passages which, as a child, he had read without understanding, while he remembered as a rule only the substance of passages that he had understood. His stock of books comprised little besides the Bible, and Watts's " Psalms and Hymns." Before be was eight years old he had read the entire Bible. He understood the four gospels to be accounts of four different advents, lives and crucifixions of the Savior, and was much disappointed when his father explained away this crowning miracle. In 1797 he was taken to the home of his aunt, Sarah Ewing Morgan, at West Liberty, where he went to school for seven months. There has been preserved one funny little incident illustrating his enthusiasm as a student. The reader which he studied had, near the end, the quotation from Proverbs, "The wicked flee when no man pursueth ; but the righteous are bold as a lion." He had kept his eye on this quotation as he struggled eagerly through the book. One day he ran home from school and in great excitement cried out to his astonished aunt, " Oh, aunty, I've got to the wicked flee !" After this visit he returned to his father's borne, which was now in Athens county, Ohio, seventeen miles beyond the frontier settlement, where he remained for several years. He soon became, next to his father, the scholar of the family, reading much aloud to his mother and sisters ; and listening to recitations by his mother, of poetry selected with great good taste, with which her memory was stored. There were some odes of Anacreon, which had been wafted to that strange and distant land. There were songs and ballads of love, misfortune, cruelty and falsehood, history and patriotism, These simple family recitals in the little cabin, before a bright hickory bark fire, gave a delight which nothing in his maturer years surpassed, As he appreciatively says, " while we gain much, there is something we lose by universal learning and abundant literature." He read everything he could lay hands on ; Æsop's Fables, The Vicar of Wakefield, newspapers, bringing to his knowledge facts about his own country which his father explained, facts of medicine, and science, questions of philosophy, disconnected, but suggestive. There was a good geography which he studied for its maps and its fragments of universal history. He walked twenty miles from home, on a trail where, for thirteen miles, there was no house, to borrow from a kindly doctor a translation of Virgil's Æneid. This at odd hours he read aloud to the hired men—rough frontiersmen. "At that point of the narrative," he says, " where Æneas discloses to Dido his purpose of leaving her, and tells her of the vision of Mercury bearing the mandate of Jove, one of the


men sprang to his feet, and declared that he did not believe a word of it,—Æneas had got tired of her and it was all a made-up story as an excuse to get off: and it was a d—d shame after all she had done for him. So the reputation of Æneas suffered by that day's reading." During the next few years he profited much by the instruction of several cultivated gentlemen who had fled to the frontier to escape temptation to intemperance. The famous " Coonskin Library " was bought by general subscription about the year 1802, he contributing ten raccoon skins, all his hoarded wealth ; it contained some seventy tolerably well-selected books, which supplied him with intellectual food for a few years. Goldsmith's plays and Ossian he particularly mentions, and also notes the absence of Shakespeare's works, which be never saw until he was twenty. But he soon outgrew his opportunities, and between fourteen and twenty made little intellectual progress. He grew to be large and powerful in physique. Much of the time from 1809 to 1812 vas speht at the Kanawha salt wells, where, by prodigious exertions, he earned enough money to cancel his father's purchase-mortgage and to pay for his own collegiate education, which he began at Ohio University, at Athens, during this time. o the regular course he added French, omitting Greek, and was graduated in 815, with the degree of Bachelor of Arts, he and one class-mate being the rst to receive a degree from a college in the Northwest Territory. He then ntered the law office of the Honorable Philemon Beecher, of Lancaster, and n 1816 was admitted to the Bar. He was, during four or five years, prosecuting attorney of Fairfield county, and succeeded in stamping out the traffic in counterfeit bank-notes theretofore prevaleht. His business and reputation grew apace. He settled his father comfortably on a farm near Cannelton, Indiana, where he died in 1824, having lived to see, as he quaintly said, his son fast becoming " one of the great law characters " of Ohio. On January 7, 1820, Mr. Ewing was married to Miss Maria Wills Boyle, daughter of Hugh Boyle, of Lancaster, a young woman of great beauty and charm. She was a devout Catholic. Their married life was one of happiness unbroken until her death, which occurred on February 20, 1864, in Lancaster, where the memory of her virtues and charities has never been forgotten. Perhaps to no one, excepting Mr. Beecher, did Mr. Ewing owe so much as to Judge Charles Robert Sherman, who had a commanding practice, and, though recognizing in Mr. Ewing a formidable and growing rival, never failed when opportunity offered to advance Mr. Ewing's reputation by countenance and commendation. This generosity was repaid, when, after Judge Sherman's untimely death in 1829, Mr. Ewing took into his family, and ultimately sent to West Point, Judge Sherman's great son, William Tecumseh Sherman. Of the Bar at that time Mr. Ewing says:

"A more delightful profession, or a kindlier set of men filling it, is hardly to be found than the Central Ohio Bar during the first ten or twelve years that I was a member. There was personal adventure enough, and physical and mental exercise enough, and more universal social feeling than generally belongs to societies of men. The lawyers on our extensive circuits were



indeed brother lawyers in habits and feeling. There was no professional jealousy among us. We lodged at the same taverns, ate at the same tables, and often to the number of eight or ten slept in he same large chamber. Generally we were employed on the circuit in cases as they arose, and went to trial on one or two days' notice. The social habits of the Bar rendered study almost impossible ; hence the pleadings and practice were loose and irregular. My habits were studious, and I felt the obligation of preparation strongly, and was often almost churlish in withdrawing from a convivial party, to study my coming cause, to the annoyance of my more liberal brethren. But they bore with my eccentricities most kindly, and, though sometimes loud, they were never bitter in their denunciations. For instance, one evening the Bar was having a pleasant sitting at our common hotel on the circuit. Happening to have a case which required study, I was out in quest of authorities, and, as the fun grew fast and furious, I returned with a law book under my arm. Dick Douglas, our wit par excellence, exclaimed as I entered the room, Here comes the living embodiment of malice at Common Law, a heart regardless of social duty, and fatally bent on mischief.' The mischief on which I was fatally bent, was a special plea or demurrer with which to defeat some good jolly brother-lawyer's case."

The following discussion of Mr. Ewing as a lawyer at the full tide of his successful practice is compiled mainly from an article by the Honorable John Welch :

" The most remarkable thing in Mr. Ewing's method of trying a case was the Napoleonic genius with which he concentrated all the forces at a single point. When you came to the trial and raised your first point, to your surprise he would concede it and you would throw aside your notes in its support. And so of all your other points but one and when you came to that you would be met by a prompt and vigorous 'No, sir.' By this time he has gained with court and jury such a character for fairness and candor that the battle is half won before the argument begins. And when you came to the argument you found that, deep as you may have gone down into the law and reason of the case, there is a lower depth where he has been. You find, moreover, that his position is defended by a bulwark of solid logic, unthought of by you, bristling with winning metaphors and well-chosen, sharp-pointed Anglo-Saxon words. His very statement of the proposition is itself an argument. He seizes it with an iron grasp, which nothing but victory can relax. In one of these tilts with an adversary, Mr. Ewing offered an item of evidence of doubtful competency, on a rather immaterial point, in an early stage of the trial. His adversary objected and sustained the objection with quite an argument. Mr. Ewing did not reply further than to say that there were authorities both ways' on the question. The court rejected this evidence. When they came to the vital part of the case it was found that evidence of the same nature was a sine qua non to the adversary's case. Mr. Ewing claimed that his adversary was estopped by the former decision. The court so ruled: and Mr. Ewing gained the case. In his concluding remarks, he made the following quotation from some antiquated version of David's psalms:

" The wicked man, he dag a pit,

He dag it for his brother;

And for himself he did fall in

The pit he dag for t' other.'

" He was capable of the severest sarcasm when occasion justified it, but rarely resorted to it, and when he did, it was in an unimpassioned and quiet way. His witticisms were frequent, but never vulgar or impure, and always


in the line of the argument. His manner towards his adversary was always kindly and conciliatory, and if his wit or sarcasm wounded him, he won him back by heaping kindness on his head. He was lenient and generous towards younger members of the bar, treating them as equals, and rendering them assistance and instruction whenever necessary and proper. Mr. Ewing was not a graceful speaker; his gestures were clumsy but natural. Direct and unconventional in manner, plain in attire as in speech, his movements of body and mind had an impetus suggestive of power to render obstruction futile. There was not always absent something of the unconscious air of a conqueror. Aside from intellectual processes and legal knowledge, his presence carried with it an undefinable ascendency of will and character. He was not an orator in the popular sense. And yet, in a proper case, a case involving pathos, he could reach the heart, flush the cheek, quicken the pulse, and start the tear. He did it without parade calmly and without any attempt at euphony. In such cases he spoke to the heart, and not to the eye or ear. On the right side of a question he was invincible, and in doubtful cases seldom failed to triumph. His arguments were perfect illustrations of the science of logic. He made his path as he went sufficiently bright to enable the audience to follow him and find it growing brighter and brighter unto the perfect day. Proposition followed proposition in regular consecutive order, compelling the hearer to anticipate the final conclusion before it was reached by the speaker; and when reached by him it was driven home to stay. His weapon was a battle-axe, and it was wielded with a giant's strength. In both thought and expression he was daring and confident. His style was smooth, plain and Addisonian ; never florid, or abounding in ore rotundo. It could be transcribed from the tongue to paper without material alteration. Almost every word was the right word in the right place, and no other word of equal force and significancy could be round to take its place. But thought and things, and not words, were his forte. With him language was a mere instrument with which to draw from his great storehouse of learning. And it was a great storehouse. It was a happy union of common sense and science, two elements not often found united in the same person. In him they both abounded in a remarkable degree. His long life was a life of study. He never forgot, but constantly reviewed, continued and enlarged his classics. Notwithstanding his extensive practice, he found time and strength to go over nearly the whole field of human knowledge. Hardly any subject escaped his research, and he had a memory that retained everything he acquired. He was an adept in the exact sciences and a born mathematician. He was familiar with Shakespeare, Milton, Byron and other English poets. He was at home in astronomy, history, zoology, anthropology and physiology. He was a botanist, a chemist and a psychologist. Besides all this, he was, of course, deeply read in the law—the common law, the civil law and the American law. He was a walking encyclopedia, and his memory was the index. He never, however, lumbered his mind with triviality, such as the page, the number of the volume, the name of the case, or the like. He had no room in his capacious mind for such little things, filled as it was to overflowing with the recollection of foundation principles, ready to be drawn upon at any moment. But the great ret of Mr. Ewing's success—its cause of causes—is the fact that he was a ant in intellect. He was a born lawyer, equally as Homer was a born poet. ature gave him a brain and a heart which no adverse surroundings could stifle or control. Those twin ,jailers of a daring heart, lowly birth and poverty, no prison that could hold him. With his own manly arm he broke the bars, and escaped into a wide world of knowledge and usefulness."


Mr. Ewing was a Whig, but took little part in politics until elected to the United States Senate in 1830. His election was due to his acknowledged supremacy at the Bar. In the Senate he added greatly to his reputation. His speeches on the tariff, in 1832, and on President Jackson's removal of the government deposits from the National Bank, in 1834, made a great impression in the Senate, and were widely read. Though in opposition to the administration, and of the minority in Congress, he, almost single handed, forced a reconstruction of the laws relating to the Post Office Department and the public lands. He did not wholly suspend his professional labors, and when at the expiration of his term, under the operation of strict party discipline, he failed of re-election, he resumed his, practice with undiminished ardor and success. When General William Henry Harrison became President in 1841, Mr. Ewing was appointed secretary of the treasury. General Harrison offered to General Reasin Beall, of Wooster, Ohio, his companion-in-arms in the Tippecanoe campaign, the portfolio of secretary of war. had General Beall accepted, the writer would have had his grandfather on his father's side, and a great-grandfather. on his mother's side, in this cabinet. General Harrison died on April 4, 1841. Vice-President Tyler, on becoming President, requested the members of the cabinet to retain their places. Congress, assembled in extra session, passed Mr. Clay's bill for rechartering the Bank of the United States, and President Tyler, against the advice of his cabinet, determined upon a veto. A new bill, prepared mainly by Mr. Ewing and Mr. Webster in accordance with the President's suggestions, and passed without alteration, was also vetoed. The limits of this sketch do not permit even a brief statement of this celebrated controversy. I deem it important, however, to say that Mr. Ewing has been wrongly represented as a mere follower of Mr. Clay, whose evident determination to force the submission of the administration seemed to Mr. Ewing arbitrary and selfish. Until he concluded that the President would betray the party, Mr. Ewing made every effort to meet the President's views; and did not consult with Mr. Clay until after resigning. His scathing letter of resignation, in which he declared that the veto' was rested " on grounds having no origin in conscience, and no reference to the public good," did much to mark the boundaries that separated the President from the true men of the party. Mr. Webster, the only member of the cabinet who did not resign, urged Mr. Ewing, before his letter was published or shown to the President, to withdraw it; and in the name of the President offered him his choice of the foreign missions, if he would part in friendship. But he declined to withdraw the letter. Before lie had resigned a member of the cabinet called to learn what he intended to do, knowing that the cabinet generally must follow his lead. He found Mr. Ewing reading a French book. Said he : " Mr. Ewing, do you read French ? " " Yes," was the rejoinder, " and walk Spanish." Mr. Ewing, though fond of public life, cheerfully resumed the practice of the law, from which he derived a large income. He continued in private life until 1849, when General Taylor selected him to organize the Home Department, now called the Department of


the Interior, of which he became the first secretary. He filled the position with great ability. Soon after entering upon his duties he offered the commissionership of the general land office to Abraham Lincoln, then retiring after a term of service in Congress, of whom Mr. Ewing had formed a high opinion. Mr. Lincoln declined the position and it was then offered to another. Afterward Mr. Lincoln changed his mind, and, finding that the President was not committed respecting the appointment, made strenuous efforts to gain it, but failed. He was a good deal cut up by his defeat. Mr. Coffee, of Lancaster, told that, going to his room, he threw himself on the bed, where he lay, dejected, for several hours. Then, rousing up, he said : " Well, I reckon they'll find some use to put me to yet." Mr. Lincoln preserved an anecdote of Mr. Ewing and Mr. Webster which is told in F. B. Carpenter's Six Weeks at the White House: On one occasion Mr. Ewing had, cohtrary to his usual custom, indulged in a somewhat bombastic prophecy to the effect that the Democratic opposition to internal improvements would result in our great canals becoming a solitude. This led to his being nicknamed Old Solitude." Soon after the formation of General Taylor's Cabinet, Mr. Webster and Mr. Ewing happened to meet at an evening party. As they approached each other Mr. Webster, who was in fine spirits, uttered in his deepest bass tone, the well known lines:

" O Solitude, where are the charms

That sages have seen in thy face ?"

After the death of the President, the cabinet resigned in August, 1850. Mr. Corwin left the Senate to enter The cabinet, and Mr. Ewing was appointed to fill the vacancy. In the debate on the Bradbury resolutions he warmly defended General Taylor and his administration. He strongly opposed the compromise measures of Mr. Clay, particularly the fugitive slave law. His term expired March 4, 1851, and he was not re-elected. Upon the breaking. up of the Whig party he no longer considered himself a member of any political organization, but at proper times, as lie once said, spoke his own free thoughts and the conclusions of his judgment. His practice, to which he returned, was now largely before the Supreme Court of the United States, and some of his greatest professional work was clone after 1850. A. suit involving a tract of land in St. Louis, in which he succeeded in establishing an old Spanish title, made his circumstances easy for the rest of his life. The most important criminal case in which he was engaged was the celebrated case which arose out of the burning of an Ohio river steamboat called the Martha Washington. It was tried at Columbus, Ohio, in the fall of 1853, before Judge McLean, of the United States Supreme Court, sitting on circuit. Mr. Ewing defended William Kissane, who was charged with having caused the vessel to be burned, to get the insurance. The Honorable Henry Stan-bery conducted the prosecution. After a tremendous battle, the jury disagreed. Kissane was released and never again put on trial. In the election of 1860 Mr. Ewing supported the candidacy of Mr. Lincoln, delivering at Chillicothe, Ohio, a " masterly speech, broad, wise and patriotic," which produced a


profound impression throughout the North. He was a member of the Peace Convention which met in Washington in February, 1861, on the invitation of the State of Virginia. He was one of the commissioners from Ohio, and his son Thomas represented Kansas, of which State he was Chief Justice, though but 31 years of age. The convention effected nothing toward composing the differences which caused the secession of the South. Though never again in office, Mr. Ewing rendered great public service as a trusted adviser of the Administration during the war. But, important as his personal service was to the Union cause, through his counsel and influence, he was prouder of the distinguished military service of members of his family. Of the splendid achievements of General Sherman, the husband of his eldest daughter, Ellen Boyle, it is needless to speak. Mr. Ewing's other daughter, Marie Theresa, became the wife of Colonel C. F. Steele, who was badly wounded in the desperate assault on Fort Wagner. Three sons, Hugh Boyle, Thomas and Charles, each attained the rank of brigadier general, and the two former the brevet rank of major general. General Hugh had been trained at West Poiht, was an able disciplinarian, and distinguished himself at Antietam, Vicksburg and Mission Ridge. General Thomas served with ability in Missouri and won a romantic fame for his heroic conduct of the Pilot Knob campaign. General Charles led his regiment in the terrific assault on Vicksburg, May 22, 1863, where, after several standard bearers had been killed, and no one volunteered, he snatched up the colors and planted them upon the parapet of the enemy's works. One son alone, Philemon Beecher, did not enter the service. He was a man of business and peace. During the war he was appointed to the Court of Common Pleas of Fairfield county, where lie is remembered as the ablest and most impartial judge that ever sat upon that Bench. In the Reconstruction and Impeachment controversies, Mr. Ewing warmly espoused the cause of President Johnson, who, on February 22, 1868, nominated him to be secretary of war. The Senate refused to confirm the nomination on the ground that, under the Tenure of Office Act, the removal of Secretary Stanton was illegal, and that therefore no vacancy existed. During this period Mr. Ewing wrote several political addresses of great power. One of these was entitled " To the unpledged voters of the United States." The New York Herald of September 7, 1868, published it, but changing the p to an f, addressed it to the " unfledged" voters, to Mr. Ewing's great disgust. He continued in active practice until 1865, after which he attended to little business besides old cases. One of these was the case of Magwire against Tyler, in which Mr. Ewing appeared for Mr. Magwire, This case came before the Supreme Court in 1862, and again in the spring of 1869, when it was decided favorably to Mr. Magwire. It came up again in the fall on a rehearing. On October 22, 1869, while addressing the Supreme Court, Mr. Ewing fainted from nervous exhaustion. He remained unconscious for several hours. On October 22, 1896, twenty-seven years later, to a day, while addressing the same court, in the same room, his son, General Thomas Ewing, lost consciousness. The venerable Justice Field, who sat at the hearings in both cases,


noted the remarkable coincidence in the date. Mr. Ewing regained his health, and his life was prolonged for two years ; but in the fall of 1871 he began to fail rapidly. On October 18, he developed alarming symptoms. Next day absolution and extreme unction were administered to him with his full knowledge and assent, and before death he received the Holy Communion, though be was not until then a member of the Catholic Church. On the 19th he calmly told his son Philemon that he could not expect to live beyond a week, perhaps not another day, and gave a few simple instructions for his funeral and the disposition of a portion of his property. He died in Lancaster on October 26, 1871, surrounded by his children and grandchildren ; and was buried by the side of his wife in the Catholic cemetery at Lancaster. Soon after his death his son, General Thomas Ewing, wrote of him : "To most of those who knew him the habits of self-restraint and intellectual labor which withdrew him from the resorts of men were a barrier to intimacy. They only knew of his power at the Bar and in the Senate. But others of culture and purity akin to his own were drawn to him by common tastes and sympathies, and learned to feel how noble and great he was. Only such can fitly commemorate him." One such friend, the lion. A. F. Perry of Cincinnati, said of him :

"The main works of Mr. Ewing's life were at the Bar. His fame was spread abroad and his great capacity made more widely known by his official positions. But his grade as a man of intelligence was definitely that of his grade at the Bar. I am not aware that I ever met a stronger man. In breadth, impetus, and logical force, Mr. Ewing's mind had no superior, at least none which has come within the range of my observation. It may be that the necessary struggles of his early life fixed upon him an aspect of sternness which he carried through the vigor of his life. His nature was too large and full not to be moved by genuine sympathies; but it was sometimes possible to wish them more demonstrative. In his later years, after his combats were ended, all this was changed. A more lovable, affectionate, sympathetic nature was never bestowed on man or woman. As he neared the evening horizon the orb of his being seemed to grow larger ; its rays neither penetrated nor scorched any more, but filled the scene with tranquil affections. While arguing the McMicken will case, he used an expression, considerately muffled, which could mean nothing else than negation of religious belief. It did not imply positive disbelief, but simply absence of belief. With such a mind as his, the line between religious belief and the want of it is narrow. It depends upon the existence of deity and the immortality of the soul, and belief in those is less the result of reason than of intuition ; rather a part of the constitution of the mind than a product of the mental operations. It would seem that as his will, the dominating trait of his mental structure, subordinated itself to the supremacy of his affections, he left that side of the line on which he stood at the McMicken argument, and passed over to the side where waited for him the departed mother of his children."

[By Thos. Ewing, Jr., New York, February 28, 1897.]


HENRY STANBERY, Cincinnati. Honorable Henry Stanbery, one of the giants in the law, was born in the city of New York, February 20, 1803, and died in the same city, June 26, 1881. He was the son of Jonas Stanbery, a physician, who emigrated to Ohio and settled in Zanesville in 1814.. Henry was a studious boy, applying himself to books with eagerness and zest. His literary taste was innate and his understanding remarkably clear. At the age of sixteen he was graduated from Washington College, Pennsylvania, and took up the study of law the same year. He was qualified for practice long before attaining his majority, but was obliged to wait for admission to the Bar until the lawful age was reached. In May, 1824, he was admitted by the Supreme Court in session on the circuit at Gallipolis. Immediately afterwards he was fortunate in receiving an invitation to become associated with Thomas Ewing. No possible association in Ohio could have been more desirable. Mr. Stanbery settled himself in the office of Mr. Ewing, at Lancaster, and soon afterwards tried his first case before a justice of the peace. It was an action of replevin for a cow, and he was accustomed to speak of it afterwards as his " great first cause, least understood." He won the case and charged his client a fee of five dollars, which was settled by note. Subsequently one-half the amount was paid in oats to the lawyer's landlord, and the balance was never paid. Mr. Stanbery kept the note throughout his life as a souvenir of his first contest and victory in the law. Such was the beginning of a lawyer who afterwards commanded thousands in a single fee. His association with Thomas Ewing continued until 1831, when the latter was elected United States Senator. He rose rapidly in his profession, rode the circuit with Mr. Ewing and other distinguished lawyers of the •locality, and won his own position in the front rank. No county Bar in the State was more eminent during a period of thirty years than that of Fairfield county. Lancaster became widely known and acquired a national reputation through the ability and character of her lawyers. Mr. Stanbery maintained his residence there until 1846, when he removed to Columbus on account of his election to the office of attorney-general of the State, created that year. He was the first occupant of the office and therefore charged with the duty of inaugurating a system for the new department of justice. He remained in Columbus about five years, and built up a valuable practice in United States courts and in the Supreme Court of the State. He was elected a member of the constitutional convention of 1850, in which his superior abilities and large experience were utilized to great advantage. His broad learning, practical wisdom and skill in parliamentary debate gave him much influence in the important discussions of that body. He was fully conscious of the responsibility resting upon the men called to the solemn duty of framing the organic laws of a prosperous commonwealth. His duty was intelligently and conscientiously performed. In 1852 he removed his law office to Cincinnati, where he continued in practice, most of his time being occupied in the appellate courts. His growth as a lawyer was uninterrupted through his whole life and his career is in evidence of the fact that acquirements in the profession are practically boundless. So long as a student of law



lives and retains possession of his faculties he may learn and grow. There is no limit save that of mental capacity. Mr. Stanbery devoted the full measure of his powers and his devotion to the law. Occasionally he delivered public addresses on popular themes, and sometimes he discussed political topics on the stump. But his place was the forum, and in the gladiatorial combats of the forum his victories were won. He was no seeker of political office and seldom participated in the fierce contests of the campaign. He was born into the Whig party and supported its creed until the interests of slavery divided it and occasioned its dissolution. His convictions led him to oppose the encroachment of slavery upon free territory, and naturally led him to join the forces organizing the Republican party. He was firm and enthusiastic in his support of the administration of President Lincoln ; firm and true in his loyalty to the Union. He accepted the office of attorney-general of the United States tendered him by President Johnson in 1866, from a noble sense of duty, after much deliberation. He recognized the peril to which the government was exposed by the unseemly and intemperate quarrel between the Executive and Congress. His desire to be of service when wisdom, integrity and conservatism were of so great importance, and the council of his most intimate friends influenced him to accept the exalted office. He resigned a year later in order to serve as one of the eminent counsel of the President under impeachment. His keenness, his grasp of principles and his discriminating knowledge of technical law were of great service in that memorable trial. The condition of his health was so delicate that he was unable to endure the strain of oral argument, and the charm of his delivery WAS lost. He was obliged to submit his argument in writing. Afterwards the President nominated him for justice of the Supreme Court, but a hostile Senate, more as a rebuke to the Executive than as an expression of unfriendliness to the nominee, refused to confirm the nomination. Mr. Stanbery returned to Cincinnati and resumed his law practice, having acquired a national reputation and a character for independent thought and action that honored him. His domestic life was always beautiful and free from discord. He was married in 1829, at Lancaster, to Frances E., daughter of Philemon Beecher, an able member of the Fairfield county Bar. By this marriage he had five children : Frances E. and Henry, deceased ; Philemon B., of Pomeroy, a lawyer and judge, whose biography is published in this volume; Louisa and George. His first wife (lied in 1840, and he was subsequently married to Cecilia Bond, daughter of William Key Bond, of Chillicothe, who survived her husband about nine years. There was no issue of this marriage. Mr. Stanbery died of acute bronchitis, after an illness of three days, in New York, and his ashes repose in the beautiful Spring Grove Cemetery, at Cincinnati. His last words were: " I have been neither saint nor savage, but have tried to do my best." Henry Stanbery was no ordinary man. His name can never be omitted from any list of half a dozen of the greatest lawyers of central and southern Ohio. Impartial history will always accord him an honorable place among the few whose national fame is imperishable. His brain possessed the


creative quality—the capacity to evolve principles, when authorities were inadequate to apply to cases of equity or law. He lived and practiced at a time when books were less numerous and authorities less prolific than in these times. It was a time when lawyers read less and meditated more on their cases. The studious were more thorough and their achievements more brilliant. The perception of Stanbery was wonderfully acute. His apprehension of facts, however carefully concealed or deeply buried by circumstances or verbiage, was marvelously clear and accurate. He was able to penetrate the thickest disguises and unravel the darkest sophistries. A judge of the Supreme Court of the United States at one time said : " Mr. Stanbery is the most-accomplished and elegant advocate that ev.er appeared before this court." His manner was reserved, but not cold or repellent. There was a pronounced dignity in his bearing that did not invite familiarity ; but there was no affectation. Perfect naturalness was characteristic of his social contact and inter. course. He was on all occasions courteous and kindly disposed toward younger members of the profession who sought his advice. Politeness was inseparable from his manners. Kindness and gentleness were among the adornments of his life under all conditions. Witnesses did not writhe and rebel under his cross-examination; for he never abused or insulted them. In gentle tones, conveying assurance of friendly interest, he directed his inquiries' to the ascertainment of the truth, and the witness, charmed and flattered .by this unusual deference, responded without reserve. His cross-examinations were successful because he disarmed antagonism and established confidential relations with the witness. He was a man of marked individuality, as well in personal appearance as mental characteristics. In stature he was tall and slender; in attitude as erect as a granite shaft. His manner of speech was earnest and impressive. One of the eminent lawyers and jurists of Ohio has contributed. a brief estimate on request of the editor :

" It is difficult to formulate an estimate of Henry Stanbery as a lawyer. Most men who have become eminent at the Bar .have shown marked characteristics which were easily discernible, and for which they were especially noted. It was not so with Mr. Stanbery. He was, beyond question, the most symmetrical and evenly rounded lawyer of great prominence of which we have knowledge. It is certain that he had no equal in this respect among the lawyers of the Ohio Bar. There have been others of perhaps greater strength in certain lines, but none of them seem to have been so evenly balanced in their talents or acquirements. There was no field of legal practice in which he was not highly accomplished and perfectly at home. His knowledge of the rules of pleading and practice seems to have been practically perfect and always at command. It was a current saying among the lawyers of his time that he never was known to make a mistake in pleading, or to misconceive the true theory of his case, or to allow any point of importance to escape him. However true this may be, it illustrates the fact that he was a most accurate common-law pleader and a most careful and accomplished lawyer.. In the trial or argument of a cause and in everything connected with his profession as a lawyer he was by general consent the most graceful-mannered man of his time. It was said of him by one of his contemporaries that he could do nothing from the picking up or laying down of a book or paper to the great-


est earnestness in the argument of a case that was not graceful and lawyer-like. He did everything naturally, and his manner at the Bar and elsewhere was characterized by the highest dignity, accompanied by a marvelous ease of manner. Ills ambition was that of a lawyer, and he cared little or nothing for political preferment. The official positions which he held were all in the line in his profession. As a member of the constitutional convention of 1851, as attorney-general of Ohio, and as attorney-general of the United States, he displayed the highest qualities of a lawyer. These positions were congenial to his nature, and he performed the duties in each of them, not only with fidelity, but with a zeal approaching enthusiasm, It has always been understood that he was, perhaps, the most influential member of the constitutional convention of 1851 which framed the present Constitution of Ohio, and this is certainly saying much, when it is remembered that he had as associates in that body such men as the late Rufus P. Ranney, Sherlock J. Andrews, Peter Hitchcock, General Samuel Mason, Judge Joseph R. Swan, and many other lawyers of marked abilities. Among those who have exercised a salutary and elevating influence upon the profession of law, it is doubtful if any man stands higher than Henry Stanbery. lie must certainly be ranked among the foremost. He honored his profession and was honored by it."

GEORGE HOADLY, Cincinnati and New York. Honorable George Hoadly, twenty-eighth governor of Ohio elected by the people, was born in New Haven, Connecticut, July 31, 1826, the only son of George and Mary Ann Homily. His mother (a daughter of William Walton Woolsey and Elizabeth Dwight Woolsey of New York) was a great-granddaughter of Jonathan Edwards, a niece of President Dwight of Yale College, a sister of President Woolsey of Yale College, an aunt of Theodore Winthrop, who was killed at Little Bethel early in the war of the rebellion, and an aunt of Miss Sarah Woolsey, known in literary society as " Susan Coolidge." His father was a man of great learning, integrity and purity of character, and very highly esteemed in social and public life, being at one time mayor of New Haven, Connecticut, and afterwards mayor of Cleveland, to which place he had removed with his family in 1830. The subject of this notice, a very bright boy, received his elementary education in Cleveland, and at the age of fourteen entered Western Reserve College at Hudson, Ohio, graduating there in 1844. He then entered the Harvard Law School at Cambridge, Massachusetts, spending one year there under the instructions of Judge Story of the Supreme Court of the United States and of Professor Simon Greenleaf, and from there he spent a year at Zanesville in the office of Charles Converse, a very prominent lawyer, who afterwards became judge of the Court of Common Pleas, and also of the Supreme Court of Ohio. Leaving in the fall of 1846, he came to Cincinnati and entered the office of Chase & Ball, and was admitted to the Bar in August, 1847. Remaining in the office of Chase & Ball, he secured the confldence and friendship of Salmon P. Chase, who, distinguished as a lawyer, as rising to prominence in political life, became governor of the State of Ohio. nator of the United States, secretary of the treasury of the United States


and finally chief justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. During all these passing years the friendship of Salmon P. Chase and George Hoadly grew warmer and stronger, and continued to the death of Judge Chase. The acute perception of the trained lawyer in the very prime of life, and at the threshold of a most noteworthy public career, enabled him to discover very quickly the remarkable capacity of the young student, fresh from law school. More than that; he soon discovered in young Hoadly that peculiar assemblage of intellectual faculties which constitutes a legal mind and affords the best endowment of a successful lawyer. The student grew into the firm and was very early entrusted with large cases. When Mr. Chase's political duties withdrew him from his professional duties, the care and trial of many cases of which he had charge devolved upon Mr. Hoadly, who had become a member of the legal firm of Chase, Ball & Hoadly. The ability manifested by him in their management secured the confidence of the clients of the firm and of his brother lawyers. In 1851 he was elected judge of the Superior Court of Cincinnati by the legislature, for the residue of the term to which that court had been limited by the constitutional convention. His predecessors, Judges Este, Coffin, Johnston and James, were all men of eminent ability, and their judgments had gained for that court a high reputation, which Judge Hoadly, notwithstanding his youth and inexperience, ably sustained. This court going out of existence, Judge Hoadly in 1853 entered into partnership with Edward Mills, and became city solicitor in 1855-6. In 1859 he again took his seat on the judicial Bench, succeeding Judge W. Y. Gholson in the new Superior Court. He was re-elected in 1864, but resigned the office in 1866 to form the partnership of Hoadly, Johnson & Jackson, which soon took rank among the most successful law firms. When the constitutional convention of 1873 was to be created, for the revision of the Constitution, he was chosen one of its members and took an active part in all its proceedings. He was chairman of the committee on municipal corporations and devoted some eight months exclusively to the work of the convention. In addition to his labors on the Bench, and at the Bar, Judge Hoadly devoted much time as professor of the Cincinnati Law School, filling a professor's chair therein for eighteen years, and at the same time was an active trustee of the Cincinnati University. In fact all his time not engaged in his legal duties was devoted to the public in some capacity. In his-early career as a politician he was a Democrat, but the growing interest in the question of slavery was creating a difference in the party. Strong-minded men like Governor Chase and Judge Hoadly refused to bow before the slave power, and boldly strove to purify the country from this black shame. From the independence of such men was born the Republican party, in which Governor Chase, Judge Hoadly and many of their Democratic friends became prominent and faithful leaders until the end of the war of the rebellion had forever made this country one of freedom, when he, with many others, returned to the Democratic party as the party of all needed reforms. In the celebrated contest between Hayes and Tilden he represented the Tilden side as


counsel before the Electoral Commission, which had been appointed by Congress to settle the disputed question of the Presidency. In 1875 his Alma Mater conferred upon him the degree of LL. D. In 1883 the Democratic State convention nominated him for governor, and, although prostrated by sickness and unable to take an active part in the campaign, he was duly elected by a plurality of thirteen thousand, notwithstanding the confidence of the Republican party with their very popular candidate. In 1851 Judge Hoadly married Mary Burnet Perry, the third daughter of Captain Samuel Perry, one of the earliest settlers of Cincinnati. He has a family of three children— George, a graduate of Harvard University, B. A. in 1879, LL. B. in 1882, a member of the legal firm of Harmon, Colston, Goldsmith & Hoadly ; Laura, and Edward Mills, a civil engineer. As a lawyer Judge Hoadly possesses large and varied abilities. He is painstaking in his researches, able and honest in counsel, clear and forcible in argument, strong in the management and trial of causes. As a judge his quick perception and deep penetration enabled him to apprehend readily the substantial matter and the legal questions 'involved in a controversy ; while his sound reasoning and integrity of purpose led to correct conclusions. He was seldom reversed. His good temper happily supplemented other qualifications for service on the Bench. He was always courteous to members of the Bar and never manifested irritation. In private and social life he is beloved and trusted as a man warm and true to his friendships, and charitable to those who differ from him. He is a good friend to a young man struggling' for success in the legal profession. In March, 1887, he removed to New York City, where the legal firm of Hoadly, Lauterbach & Johnston was formed, to the extensive business of which the judge now confines his attention. He is entirely out of politics.

ALLEN GRANBERY THURMAN, lawyer, jurist, statesman and scholar, came from that State which has produced so many names illustrious and influential in American history. For six generations his ancestors had been natives of " Old Dominion "—Virginian descendants of Cavalier stock. He was born at Lvnchburg, Virginia, November 13, 1813. His father was the Rev. Pleasant Thurman, a Methodist minister, and his mother was an only daughter of Colonel Nathaniel Allen, nephew and adopted son of Joseph Hewes, the latter one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence. In 1819, when Allen Thurman was but six years of age, his father transplanted the family to Ohio, for the reason, it is said, that he had renounced his belief in slavery and desired to emancipate his bondsmen, and on the free soil of the young and promising Buckeye State, take a fresh lease upon life. The family settled in the pretty and then thriving village of Chillicothe, which was thereafter the home of Allen Thurman until his removal to Columbus in 1853. The father's capital, at the time of locating in Chillicothe, consisted mainly of his ability, industry and education, and to support the family in the new northern home, he taught school. His son Allen, a slender, sickly lad, was one of his


pupils, at once distinguished for studious and industrious habits—traits which characterized him through his entire, eventful life. The father and teacher died a few years after the removal to Chillicothe, and Allen's education was thereafter directed, and indeed mostly conducted by the good mother, a woman of rare mind and attainments and well able to impart most excellent instruction. Allen fitted for college, attending the Chillicothe Academy, but the home could not spare the means necessary to send the boy to college, and Allen, from this period on, may be classed, with many of our most distinguished public men, as self-educated." He most ambitiously and diligently improved his opportunities. His resolution, that he would through his own efforts acquire, at home, as much as his more fortunate early school-mates might learn at, college, was more than realized. While maintaining himself and assisting in the support of his widowed mother, he ardently adhered to his books and read and studied unceasingly. At eighteen, when a clerk in the town post office, he learned from the postmaster, also one of the official surveyors of the Virginia Military District in Ohio, the science of land surveying, which he practiced while fitting himself for the Bar. By association with a neighboring French-Canadian family in which, gossip romantically relates, there was an attractive mademoiselle for whom Allen had a boyish attachment, he obtained a fair knowledge of the French language—a study he never ceased to cultivate—which became his favorite literary recreation and yielded him profit and pleasure throughout life. He had begun the study of law under the tutorage of his uncle William Allen, a resident of Chillicothe, afterwards United States Senator and governor of Ohio, and at twenty-one was appointed private secretary to governor Robert Lucas. With the governor he temporarily resided at Columbus, the State capital. His position in the governor's office afforded him many opportunities and advantages. While discharging the duties of this office he continued his legal studies with Noah H. Swayne, then one of the leading lawyers of Columbus, and later associate justice of the United States Supreme Court. At the age of twenty-two (1833), Allen Thurman was admitted to the Bar and at once began, in Chillicothe, the practice of his chosen profession, in which he immediately displayed marked proficiency. He became the law partner of his uncle, William Allen, who was at this time a member of Congress, and who entrusted his large law practice to the care of his nephew, young Thurman, The Honorable R A. Harrison, in a speech on the " Early Ohio Bar," says of Mr. Thurman at this time :

" His possession, in an unusual degree, of the personal qualities and traits of character which at once attract attention and inspire confidence — his great power of patient and persistent investigation, thoroughly digesting and making available for use his accumulation of knowledge his prompt instinct of the substance of principles and affairs — the keenness of his power of analysis and at the same time the strength of his power of generalization — his great readiness and skill in the use of every weapon of honorable forensic warfare—his sterling integrity — his self-reliance and independence of character — and his striking personality quickly gave him high rank in his chosen profession, and a large practice throughout southern Ohio, and placed him on the Supreme


Bench of this State, with the universal approval and acclaim of the Bar, when be bad been a practicing lawyer only sixteen years. Among the second generation of the early Ohio Bar, Allen G. Thurman was universally recognized as a leader. In order to fully appreciate this fact, it should be remembered that there were giants in those days, and a good many of them. The fame of many Of Judge Thurman's colleagues at the early Ohio Bar, both as lawyers and as statesmen, was as broad as the country. Their careers somewhat influenced the course of his career. The names of some of them became as familiar as household words in every American home. Among his contemporaries may be mentioned Thomas Ewing, William Allen, Thomas Corwin, Thomas L. Hamar, Samuel F. Vinton, Thomas Morris, Charles Hammond,-Benjamin Tappan, Henry Stanberry, Salmon P. Chase, Benjamin F. Leonard, George E. Pugh, Thomas Scott Robert C. Schenck, William Creighton, Rufus P. Ranney, Noah H. Swayne (one of Judge Thurman's law preceptors), Morrison R. Waite, Stanley Matthews, Benjamin F . Wade, John Sherman, George H. Pendleton. William S. Groesbeck, Aaron F. Perry, William Dennison, Jr., Hocking H. Hunter, Joseph Olds, Sherlock J. Andrews, Wells A. Hutchins, Edwin M. Stanton, Sampson Mason, William Johnston, Peter Odlin, William Kennon. Joseph R. Swan, Phineas B. Wilcox, Charles B. Goddard, William A. Nelson Barrere, Clement L. Vallandigham, James H. Thompson, Bellamy John W. Andrews, John T. Brasee, Henry B. Payne, George Hoadly, awe; Charles Fox Nathaniel Wright, William Y. Gholson, William V. Peck, Oscar. F. Moore, Richard Stilwell, and Alfred S. Dickey. Is there any State in the Union that has ever had a Bar of greater men, either as lawyers or statesmen, than the Bar of which Judge Thurman was one of the most conspicuous members ?"

In November, 1844, Mr. Thurman was married to Mrs. Mary Tompkins, a daughter of Walter Dun of Fayette county, Kentucky, and widow of Mr. Gwynne Tompkins of Lexington, Kentucky. Upon the death of her husband, Mrs. Tompkins with her mother and little daughter had removed to Chillicothe. This marriage proved a most happy one for both parties. They were inseparable and loving and congenial companions for nearly half a century, until Mrs. Thurman's death in 1893. The same fall and just before his marriage, Mr. Thurman was elected by the Democrats of his district, which usually gave a Whig majority, to the 29th Congress. When he entered that body December 1, 1845, lie was its youngest member. At this time Congress became agitated with a fresh outbreak of the " irrepressible conflict" concerning slavery. In this his first service in public life Mr. Thurman evidenced his ability, his strong partisanship, his unflinching integrity and his fearless independence. lie was always a Democrat of the strictest sect, but fair and just. In the House of Representatives he took no aggressive stand against slavery in the Southern States, but with many other Northern Democrats he opposed the attempted repeal of the Missouri Compromise, which restricted the territorial limit of slavery, and he supported by voice and vote the " Wilmot Proviso," which proposed to extend the anti-slavery provisions of the Ordinance of 1787 to our newly acquired Mexican territory. It is claimed for Mr. Thurman that he was at no time in sympathy with the traitorous and rebellious teachings of the Calhoun school of Democracy, but that he was on all occasions outspoken in his opposition to the doctrines of nullification and secession. Some of the


platforms of his party in Ohio drawn by himself are quoted as evidence of Mr. Thurman's loyal views. In the House of Representatives Mr. Thurman was placed on the judiciary committee and readily distinguished himself as a young lawyer of great promise. In spite of the brilliant and auspicious opening of his political life Mr. Thurman's experience in the 29th Congress did not conform to his taste or his ambition, and at the end of his term he decided-that the practice of law was more congenial to him than a public career, and declining a renomination, he returned to his law office in Chillicothe and there rapidly acquired a large and lucrative practice until 1851, when at the age of thirty-eight he was elected one of the five Supreme Judges of Ohio under the newly adopted State Constitution. In this election he led the other names on the ticket by 2,000 votes. He served as Chief Justice from December, 1854, to February, 1856, when he refused a renomination and resumed his law practice at Columbus, which became his residence for, the remainder of his life, excepting his official stay in Washington. As a member of the Bench Mr. Thurman ranks exceedingly high. His cotemporaries were Rufus P. Ranney, Thomas W. Bartley, Joseph R. Swan and William Kennon—a remarkably strong body of men. Mr. Thurman was not a legal genius like Mr. Ranney, nor had he the intellectual instinct of Mr. Swan, but he had an innate and unerring sense of justice, a breadth and impartiality of view, a rugged and unswerving hatred of wrong and fraud. He hewed to the line of truth, let the chips fall where they would. Fairness united with a firm grasp upon the fundamental principles of law and justice gave his decisions great weight. His opinions as recorded in the reports of the Supreme Court are conspicuous for their clear, cogent reasoning and accurate statement of the law. He is universally recognized as one of the ablest, most learned and best judges in every respect, Ohio has ever had. After retiring from the Bench, for some ten years Judge Thurman devoted himself assiduously and most successfully to the practice of the profession he so fondly followed. Ripe in learning and experience, few lawyers were his equal. Of the lawyer at this period a distinguished intimate friend writes :

"To us business men he was a lawyer and his place of business was a one story, two-room frame house, on his home lot, located where the Great Southern Hotel now stands (Columbus, Ohio). The sign at the door read Allen G. Thurman, Attorney at Law. The front office was a store-room of books—not of law only, for he was an omnivorous reader—upon which he could draw for anything and everything in useful literature. The rear office was his workshop, where, piled in careless confusion on shelves, tables, chairs and on the floor, were the books and documents of his current work.

" A courteous, kindly greeting met the caller at the door, whether he be a client with thousands at stake ; a young lawyer seeking advice and help; a neighbor to have a chat ; a book agent, bringing coals to Newcastle ; an office-seeker, with an application for his signature ; or a tramp begging a dime. Judge Thurman's natural goodness of heart made his office an ever flowing spring, in which cups of every kind were dipped and filled, and deeply drank from, as the water so freely given was pure and refreshing. That office was a work-shop where midnight oil was burned, for then at least he was undis-


turbed. Clad in an old knit woolen jacket with unbuttoned vest, easy slippers in his feet, while a dense cloud of tobacco smoke formed a halo around his lead, he pored over his books and did his thinking and writing. Such application and industry turned out only the best of work, in law and fact. There, truth impaled sophistry, ethics unmasked hypocrisy, logic had no fustian, and awning being from the initial, the conclusions were rational. Advice given and papers drawn in that office were terse, clear and comprehensive ; saying lust what was meant, and meaning just what was said.

"Judge Thurman's judicial mind saw clearly both and all sides of a question, and his honesty of purpose said that justice and not chicanery should be mbodied in every paper that went from his office.

"He was a close student, a wide reader, and was gifted with an unusually tenacious memory ; hence he stored a large fund of information which he could it any and all times promptly use to the best advantage.

"His mathematical mind loved truth for the truth's sake, and he pursued the truth regardless of obstacles, as he did in his early life, when a land sur- veyor. He went with his instruments straight and steadily on to a closure, regardless of a tree, or rock, or river, or swamp ; and the greater the obstacles, the greater his satisfaction in overcoming them.

"He loved the law more than the profits thereof, as his fees were mod. compared with those of other lawyers for like work. In his views; 214 duty of a lawyer to his client was to prevent, not encourage litigation; but if that could not be, then to fight to the end."

His style in the court room was a splendid sample of the old school of advocates. lie thoroughly mastered a case before presenting it. He had a relentless bold on the great principles of law and he employed facts with the unerring aim that a frontier huntsman would drive a bullet to its mark He was slow in coming to a conclusion, very forcible in expressing it when reached. His mind worked in a logical order, so that he was truly convincing it the Bar. He would sum up a case and deliver it to a jury as a general would organize, marshal and move his troops upon a redoubt—arranging law and facts in a most invincible and comprehensive way. He utterly spurned the shams and tricks and deceptive technicalities of law, or forensic bombast. His simplicity and truth made him almost irresistible. His method of speed was of the most direct character. He made little effort to ornament his argument, but talked right on in plain, pure, strong, good old English. There was no rhetorical pyrotechnics, few if any quotations from poets or orators—nothing " to tickle the ear or please the fancy." His effort was to convince mid persuade, and he commanded alike the closest attention of the most learned judge or most illiterate juror. Judge Thurman's last appearance as a lawyer in the courts of the country was as one of the counsel for the State in wheat is known as the " Tally-sheet Forgery," tried in the Common Pleas Court, Franklin county, in 1887, Many weeks were occupied in the trial off this case. The defendants were charged with altering tally sheets so as to defraud certain persons out of offices to which they had been elected. Them accused were members of Judge Thurman's political party, but his anxiety Mc preserve the purity of elections was so intense that he did not hesitate to enter upon this prosecution and conduct it with great vigor. For many weeks


although constantly suffering great physical pain, he was in daily attendance upon the court. His argument was one of great power and replete with the noblest sentiments of patriotism. We reproduce his closing words to the jury, which were inspired not only by his love of party, but by a stronger love for his country :

" But I do want this party to which I belong now more than sixty years —for I began when I was a child — this party which has done so much for me and which I have conscientiously believed in, which has its faults, which has been wrong sometimes, as all parties have been wrong, but in which I have believed, to which my faith has been pledged and has been kept — I do want that party in the going down of the sun of my life, when I shall look for the last time abroad on the earth, I do want to see that party still standing, still respected, still honored and still deserving the good will and kindness and support of all my fellow-beings."

During the decade from 1857, when Judge Thurman retired from the Supreme Bench, until his re-entrance into public life, the great Civil War spread its horrors over the country. Judge Thurman desired to be regarded during the period as a patriotic War Democrat. In a letter to a friend he defined his position in this national crisis in these words : "I did all I could to help preserve the Union without war, but after it began I thought there was but one thing to do, and that was to fight it out. I therefore sustained all constitutional measures that tended in my judgment to put down the rebellion. I never believed in the doctrine of secession." In 1867 Judge Thurman was placed in nomination as the Democratic candidate for the governorship. His Republican opponent was Geheral Rutherford B. Hayes, who was then a representative in Congress. This gubernatorial campaign was most exciting and closely contested. The questions at issue were the national reconstruction measures which the Democrats bitterly assailed, taking their stand upon a platform prepared by Clement L. Vallandigham and practically advocating State supremacy. In this election also was involved the adoption or rejection of an amendment to the Ohio State Constitution, eradicating the restriction of the elective franchise to " white" citizens and granting negro manhood sufrage, This amendment had been submitted to the voters of the State by a joint resolution of the Republican legislature of 1866-7. With his party Mr. Thurman opposed the amendment and in the campaign vigorously stumped the State for over four months. The result was a partial victory for the Democracy. Judge Thurman was defeated for governor by less than 3,000 majority — the negro suffrage amendment was overwhelmed V with some fifty thousand adverse majority, and the Democrats carried, by a small majority, both branches of the legislature. Both Mr. Thurman and Mr. Vallandigham became candidates for the United States senatorship. The Democratic caucus, by a vote of two to one, selected Mr. Thurman, and on March 4, 1869, he took his seat in the Senate, succeeding Benjamin F. Wade. At the close of his first term his party again carried the legislature, thus securing his re-election to the Senate. At this same State election ex-Senator William Allen, his uncle, was elected governor, by less than one thousand majority. Mr. Thurman was thus


accorded a continuous senatorial career for twelve years (1868-1880). Judge Thurman's service in the Senate won for him the esteem and confidence not only of his own party, but, to a great extent, of his countrymen without regard to party. When he entered the Senate he found his party coldleagues but a handful of Democrats — a minority numbering but one to five of their Republican opponents. He was readily assigned the leadership of his political confreres. He coped with a galaxy of eminent statesmen. He met during his service Sherman, Conklin, Blaine, Edmunds, Morrill, Evarts, Logan, Carpenter, Hoar, Chandler, Morton, Cameron and others, most distinguished for ability, eloquence and statecraft. He was easy the peer of any in his own party, and in him the chiefs of his antagonists met a " foeman worthy of their steel." There was not one important debate in the Senate while he was a member in which he did not take a conspicuous part, and no member was more respectfully or attentively listened to. He was not a showy speaker. His long connection with the Ohio Supreme Court. Bench gave him a certain judicial manner, which was always noticeable whenever he addressed the Senate. It was like a judge summing up a case to the jury. Apart from his great legal attainments, clearness of comprehension, logical method of statement and readiness in reply, this habit of taking both sides of the question into account and considering them impartially was, to a certain extent, one of the sources of his great influence. It bas this which gave his words such weight that whenever he stood up to speak men always expected to get a clear idea of the question at issue. He was less a partisan pleader than a judicial expounder. His methods of defense and attack were singularly effectual in a serenely deliberative body like the Senate. He seldom delivered prepared and formal speeches, and although he often spoke at length upon important questions, his efforts were usually off-hand and extemporaneous. He exercised great influence, due to his pure and honest character and his blunt and fearless courage in the exposure and denunciation of fraud and corruption — no matter whether the exposure might uncover foe or friend. He won a reputation for judicial fairness and readiness, dignity and power in debate, especially upon questions of constitutional law. Of his legal standing as a member of the Senate and the opinion concerning him shared by one of his greatest opponents the anecdote is related that during a long legal argument Senator Conkling repeatedly turned to Judge Thurman, addressing his remarks apparently to him alone. They were not particularly complimentary or agreeable, and Judge Thurman, feeling that Mr. Conkling was giving him too much of his attention, asked excitedly and in an angry tone: " Does the senator from New York expect me to answer him every time he turns to me ? " Conkling hesitated a moment, and the crowded galleries bent over expecting a scene. They were disappointed. With his inimitable grace, Mr. Conkling replied : " When I speak of the law I turn to the senator from Ohio as the Mussulman turns towards Mecca. I turn to him as I do to the English common law, as the world's most copious fountain of human jurisprudence." Mr. Thurman was chairman of the important committee on judiciary of the Senate. It was


in that capacity that he rendered his best service to his country, and in this, so far as it was the unpartisan service of resisting attempts upon the public treasury, he was loyally aided by his close friend, the leading Republican lawyer of the Senate and a member of the judiciary committee also, Judge George F. Edmunds, of Vermont. Together they secured the passage of the " Thurman Act," enforcing the obligations of the Pacific Railroad to the government, the most signal victory won in our time in a pitched battle between the people of the United States and those who wished to despoil them. How Thur-man's ability and character were seed by his political opponents is shown by the following extract from James G. Blaine's " Twenty Years of Congress" :

" His rank in the Senate was established from the day he took his seat. He was an admirably disciplined debater, was fair in his methods of statement, logical in his argument, honest in his conclusions. He had no tricks in discussion, no catch phrases to secure attention, but was always direct and manly. He left behind him the respect of all with whom he had been associated during his twelve year of honorable service."

In a letter to the writer of this article, received soon after Judge Thurman's death, ex-Senator George F. Edmunds, of Vermont, thus speaks of him:

" He was a man of extraordinary learning, both in law and literature. He was easily the recognized chieftain of his party during his career in the Senate. He was a clear, concise and powerful debater. Although we differed radically upon subjects .that are called party politics, I always felt absolutely safe in relying upon his powerful co-operation and patriotism in respect to all business affairs of the Nation. And where we differed I could not but admire and respect the intensity of his conviction and his pure earnestness of purpose. He was a man of absolutely upright character and honor."

While he was generally classed as a strict party man and as essentially conservative, his consistency of purpose and integrity were always evident. He opposed the Civil Rights Act on the grounds upon which it was after ward overthrown by the Supreme Court he opposed the Redemption Act, supported the Bland-Allison Act and the anti-Chinese legislation. He was a member of the Electoral Commission in 1877, and one of the seven voting to seat Tilden as against the eight voting for Hayes. During the administration of President Hayes, when the Democratic party was in the ascendency in the Senate, Mr. Thurman was chosen president pro tem. of that body. The Republicans controlled the legislature chosen to elect Mr. Thurman's successor. James A. Garfield was their choice, but before the time for him to take his office, he had been elected President of the United States. As he was inaugurated March 4, 1881, Mr. Thurman retired from the Senate, yielding his seat to John Sherman, then retiring with the cabinet of Mr. Hayes. Between President Garfield and Senator Thurman there had long existed the most cordial personal relations, and the newly-made President appointed the retiring senator, with ex-Senator William M. Evarts, of New York, and ex-Senator Timothy 0. Howe, of Wisconsin, as United States Commissioners to the Inter national Monetary Conference held in Paris in 1881. Upon his return, after



year spent in Europe, Mr. Thurman was elected with ex-Chief Justice Thomas Cooley, of Michigan, and ex-Minister Elihu B. Washburne, of Illinois, to serve upon the Advisory Commission in the troubles over the differential rates between the trunk railroads leading across the country. In the Democratic National Convention of 1876, at St. Louis, Senator Thurman received a few votes as a nominee for the Presidency. In the convention of 1880, at Cincinnati, the first ballot gave him the entire vote of the Ohio delegation, with considerable support from other States. In 1884 he was a delegate at large to the National Convention of his party at Chicago, and was again put in nomination, and stood next to Cleveland and Bayard on the first ballot. In the convention of 1888, at St. Louis, he was nominated for Vice-President by acclamation, but in the election was defeated, with Mr. Cleveland at the head of the ticket. In this campaign, although in his seventy-fifth year, he surprised both political friends and foes by the vigor of his efforts. lie made powerful speeches for his party in many of the leading cities of the Union. After that political contest he lived quietly in retirement in his beautiful home at Columbus. edied peacefully, surrounded by his children and grandchildren, December 12, 1895. Senator Thurman was in appearance a striking and picturesque personage. His figure, heavy-set and rather below the average height, supporting a massive head, with large, rugged features, framed in a somewhat shaggy beard and long, profuse locks of hair, at once suggested a leonine nature and mind. In harmony with this was a heavy but pleasing voice. His presence commanded attention and respect under any surroundings. But the chief elements that entitled him to the esteem of the public and the admiration of personal friends were the modesty and simplicity of his manner, the integrity of his motives, the honesty of his methods and the purity of his private life. He was ever kind and generous, and never neglected to extend a helping hand to the deserving who sought his advice and assistance. Looking back upon his past life, he once said, in tones that broken health made tremulous, to one of his lifelong friends: " I never intentionally wronged a human being out of anent." Perhaps nothing better illustrates the man's life than that simple remark. In fact, honesty and justice were religion with him. The creeds of churches never bothered him greatly. He read and studied the Bible as as studied all that he deemed worthy of an earnest man's attention in literature, but he never professed a religious belief. It has been justly observed that the sobriquet of " Old Roman " that was applied to Judge Thurman of late years had more appropriateness than such nicknames, especially of eulogistic kind, are apt to have in our politics. There was, indeed, something Roman in the combination of his character. He was not a gentleman of the Chesterfield an school of politeness ; his address was liable to be abrupt, but kindly; his courtesy was inherent, not assumed or acquired; he was genial, and his good humor seldom ruffled. He abhorred ostentation, never advertising himself in the press; kept no scrap-books of newspaper compliments, and despised the public man who kept a diary. On his seventy-seventh birthday anniversary the Thurman Club of Columbus, Ohio, tendered Mr. Thurman a


banquet, known as the " Old Roman " banquet, at which a thousand men, many of them of national renown, drawn from all parts of the country, participated. President Cleveland presided, and toasts were responded to by many prominent government officials and leading orators. It was a remarkable and rare tribute to a citizen in private life—a voluntary homage to the character of one wholly withdrawn from public office or influence. Perhaps this sketch cannot be more fittingly closed than with the quotation repeated by Governor McKinley at the Thurman Memorial Meeting held at Columbus a few days after Mr. Thurman's death. Said Mr, McKinley, " I can never forget when the shafts of malice were cast at General Garfield, Judge Thurman was among the first to proclaim his faith in the honesty and purity of that statesman. I want to read you what General Garfield said sixteen years ago, when elected to succeed Judge Thurman in the Senate. This, my friends, is the message to you from the martyred President. I would have every word placed on your record. It is not only a voice from the dead, but expresses the sentiment of every one of our sixty millions of people. Garfield said :

" I recognize the importance of the place to which you have elected me, and I should be base if I did not also recognize the great man whom you have elected me to succeed. I say for him that Ohio has had few larger-minded, broader-minded men in the record of our history than Allen G. Thurman. Diftfering widely from him as I have done in politics, and do, I recognize him as a man high in character and great in intellect ; and I take this public occasion to refer to what I have never before referred in public, that many years ago, in the storm of party fighting, when the air was filled with all sorts of missiles aimed at the character and reputation of public men, when it was even for his party interest to join in the general clamor against me and my associates, Senator Thurman said in public in the campaign on the stump—when men are as likely to say unkind things as at any place in the world—a most generous and earnest word of defense and kindness for me which I shall never forget so long as I live. I say, moreover, that the flowers that bloom over the garden wall of party politics are the sweetest and most fragrant that bloom in the gardens of this world. And where we can fairly pluck them, and enjoy their fragrance, it is manly and delightful to do so.' "

RICHARD A. HARRISON, Columbus. Richard A. Harrison is a native of our mother country, that land that shares with ancient Rome the honor and glory of originating the legal and judicial system that is the pride and model of our modern civilization. He was born April 8, 1824, in the city of Thirsk, Yorkshire county, England. His father was Robert Harrison, a mechanic and a local minister of the gospel in the Methodist Episcopal Church, a man of sterling character and pronounced intellectuality. His mother was Mary Almgill, a woman of the good English stock of the beautiful and prosperous shire of York. Richard came to the United States with his parents in 1832; the family were induced to make this transplanting of their home from " Merrie England " to the " home of the free and the land of the brave " by the accounts which they had received from a son who had preceded them in



the emigration. They first settled in Waynesville, Warren county, Ohio, and shortly thereafter removed to Springfield, Clark county. Richard at this time was but eight years of age, and was the youngest of nine children. His parents bestowed upon the boy all that parental love could prompt, and the thrift and frugality of a humble home could spare. But Richard's training was mostly in the preparatory school of adversity and later the broader university of the world's affairs. The rudiments of his education were acquired in the public schools of his village, especially the Springfield High School, from which young Richard graduated during the principalship of the scholarly and accomplished Rev. Chandler Robbins. While still in school he contributed to his own support by faithfully fulfilling the humble duties of "devil " in a printing office, and at the age of twelve, thrown solely upon his own resources, he sought and obtained employment in the office of the Springfield Republic, then edited and managed by John M. Gallagher, at one time speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives, the editor of the Ohio State Journal for several years, and a man of great ability and encyclopedic information. The Republic was in those days the influential Whig paper of the State. Under this most practical and valuable tutelage, Richard remained until 1844. It was the formative and informing period of the boy's mind, and in this academy of the " Art of Arts "—the printing office—which has graduated self-made men whose merited laurels in life's struggles have outshone the honor of many another's college degrees, Richard, like that other " Poor Richard of Benjamin Franklin, became accomplished in the accurate knowledge and facile use of his mother tongue, as well as endowed with that knowledge of multitudinous affairs that it is the province of the press to gather and disseminate. Without doubt it was in these years, when he stood plodding patiently at the compositor's case, that the foundation was laid of his ready and precise diction, so that both in speech and with the pen "his words, like so many nimble and airy servitors, trip about him at command." The true lawyer, like the genuine poet, is born, not made. And the natural and irresistible bent of Richard's mind was in the direction of the legal profession, and he readily accepted the opportunity of becoming a student in the law office of William A. Rodgers, one of the most eminent members of the Ohio Bar. This he did in the year 1844. The late William White, a judge of the Court of Common Pleas ten years and of the Supreme Court of Ohio twenty years, and at the time of his decease a judge of the United States District Court, was a school-mate of Mr. Harrison and a fellow-student in the law office of Judge Rodgers in Springfield, Ohio. Mr. Harrison, after eighteen months' study under the direction of Judge Rodgers, entered the Cincinnati Law School, the first law school established west of the Alleghanies, at that time having such admirable instructors as William S. Groesbeck and Charles Telford. The full course of the school was but six months, and he graduated in the spring of 1846, and by virtue of his diploma was admitted, without further examination, to the Bar on his twenty-second birthday, April 8, 1846, at London, Ohio, by Judges Hitchcock and Wood of the Supreme Bench. At