BENCH AND BAR - 375 M. Dorr, Charles W. Hill, Hiram Walbridge, James M. Whitney, Charles E. Perigo, Lewis McL. Lambert, Jerome Myers, and William H. Hall. Some of these attained distinction in law practice, and one—Gen. Hiram Walbridge—removed to New York City, was elected to Congress, and became prominent as a politician. At Maumee City, at an early period, were David Higgins, John M. May, Nathan Rathburn, Henry C. Stowell, Horace F. Waite, Samuel M. Young, Henry S. Commager, Morrison R. Waite, and Daniel F. Cook. Mr. Commager was successful as a lawyer—was conspicuous as a politician, possessing the confidence of his friends and the respect of his opponents—and during the great civil conflict made an honorable record, at the close of the war holding the rank of brigadier-general. He died at Galveston, Texas, Aug. 14, 1867. In the list of lawyers of the olden time—some of whom occasionally, as they were retained in cases, and others regularly attended the terms of court—were Joseph R. Swan, Edward Wade, Orris Parrish, Joshua R. Giddings, Noah H. Swayne, Benjamin F. Wade, Charles Sweetser, and others of equal note. In looking over the Lucas County court docket for the terms held in 1836 and 1837, I find the interests of parties in the hands of Giddings & Osborn, May & Young, J. Stetson, Glasgow & Way, Wheeler & Morton, Stone & Brown, Swayne & Brown. Reed & Hosmer (Perrysburg lawyers, Henry Reed and Hezekiah L. Hosmer), Perkins & Osborn, C. L. Boalt, E. E. Evans, Purdy & Morton. G. W. Stanley, Samuel B. Campbell, E. Allen, Wing. & Noble ; and in 1839, E. S. Hamlin, W. P. Berry, Hitchcock & Wilder, Evans, Darling & Lownsbury, and John Wilson. And coming down to 1844, we discover in charge of cases the names of Stowell & Commager, J. R. Hopkins. B. W. Rouse, Allen & Stetson, McKay Scott, A. & J. M. Coffinberry, W. M. Scott, and Lathrop, Morton & Whitney. Judge John H. Doyle, in his interesting sketch of the Lucas County Bar, published in the "History of the City of Toledo," edited by Clark Waggoner and published in 1888, gives a very full and comprehensive history of the bar from 184.4. until 1888. This history is in the Public Library and in very many private libraries, and is quite accessible to the public. For this reason, and for the further reason that my space is limited, I have concluded that it would not be advisable or feasible to repeat this history in the present work, and will, with a few exceptions, make my history of the bar preliminary and supplementary to this history by Judge Doyle. COUNT COFFINBERRY. Count Coffinberry was a tall, slender, and very elegant appearing gentleman. He was an exquisite dresser, and spared no expense in having his wardrobe of the very best and most fashionable cut and materials. His usual 'costume was a blue, spiketailed coat, with brass buttons, and buff waistcoat and trousers, ruffled shirt and silk stockings. He had fine features and a very refined face, and was altogether a good deal of a beau. His right name was Andrew Coffinberry, and he was 376 - MEMOIRS OF LUCAS COUNTY called Count Coffinberry on account of his princely dress and deportment. When traveling the circuit, always on horseback, he carried his wardrobe in a portmanteau in his saddlebags. Before he would get to his destination the mud would play havoc with his fine clothes, and, as one lawyer said, he would look like the devil and Tom Walker ; -but when he reached the end of the trip he would go to his room in the tavern, fish out another suit, and come down to the office as fresh as a daisy. I take the following sketch from Knapp's History of the Maumee Valley, page 307: "Andrew Coffinberry, Esq., was born at Martinsburg. Berkley county, Virginia, Aug. 20, 1788, where his grandparents had settled in 1750, having emigrated from Wirtemburg and Strasburg. He removed with his father, George Coffinbury, or Coffinbargar, as his German neighbors called him, to Ohio county, Virginia, in 1799, and from there to Chillicothe, Ohio, in 1806; thence to Lancaster. Ohio, in .1807. At this place he 'left his father and shipped for two years in the naval service, and served his time under Bainbridge and Hull, then rejoined his father, who had removed to Mansfield. Ohio, in the fall of 1808, or spring of 1809. He remained with his father during the war of 181213, living sometimes in a log cabin, and at others, when the settlement was menaced by hostile Indians, in one of the block-houses erected upon the public square of the village. At the close of the war he read law with John M. May, Esq., at Mansfield. where he continued to reside until he removed to Perrysburg, in 1836. For some Years before leaving Mansfield, he regularly attended the sessions of the Common Pleas and Supreme Courts in all or nearly all the counties of Northwestern Ohio, beginning with the organization of most of these counties. and continuing down to a few days before his death, which transpired at Findlay, Ohio, May 12, 1856. "We are not able to state definitely at what time he first began to attend the courts of Wood and Lucas counties, but he was of counsel to Governor Lucas in the border controversy between the State of Ohio and Territory of Michigan, and accompanied Governor Lucas in his military expedition to the frontier, for the purpose of vindicating by the wager of battle, the title of the State of Ohio to the harbor of Toledo, in the spring of 1835. * * * * * * * * "But when it is understood that for almost half a century he was associated in the practice of his profession with men of the character and caliber of Thomas Ewing, Charles H. Sherman, William and Henry Stanbery, Wyllis Silliman, Ebenezer Lane, Josiah Scott, Orris Parish, T. W. Bartley, Jacob Parker and Hosmer and Henry B. Curtis ; and in the later years of his life with Richard Cook, George B. Way, John C. Spink, Thomas W. Powell, Henry S. Commager, D. 0. Morton, M. H. Tilden, M. R. Waite, and many other scarcely less distinguished lawyers of the Maumee Valley ; and that he was beloved and honored by them without an exception, it is almost superfluous for BENCH AND BAR - 377 us to say that he was not only an excellent lawyer, an honest, honorable man, but a great hearted, genial gentleman as well. "His boyhood was passed so entirely upon the extreme verge of Western civilization, and so surrounded with the perils of Indian warfare and the vicissitudes of pioneer life, as to deprive him of the advantages of early culture. He informed us that he had attended school for but three months of his life, but by his own unaided efforts he acquired a good English education, made considerable proficiency in the study of the French and German languages, and became a well read and thoroughly intelligent man. He was indifferent to the acquisition of wealth, fearless and outspoken in the expression of his convictions on all subjects, never united with a church, and never became a member of any association, order or society of any kind. He was without malice, and there was no taint of bitterness or ill-nature in his composition, but he could not tolerate pedantry, hypocrisy or humbug of any kind. He was faithful to all his engagements, zealous and efficient in the cause of his client. If he ever had a hobby, it was his passion for the study and investigation of geological science. His habits were always good, his life was simple and pure, but amongst all his compeers no one enjoyed convivial occasions more than he, whilst his quaint wit and pleasant temper contributed largely to the enjoyment of others. Many good stories are told of him. Having one night attended the wedding party of his friends, John M. May and Miss Eliza Wolf, his four-year-old boy appeared at his bedside at daybreak the next morning and called him to account for keeping late hours the night before. He was told that his father and mother had been out until after midnight, helping May catch a Wolf. The urchin took to his trotters and made a straight shirt-tail (having no other garment on) for May's lodging. where he promptly appeared, shouting : `Mr. May, I want to see your Wolf.' May replied. 'Here she is Gunner, come and see her'. The urchin scrambled upon the bed and was fairly caught by 'Mr. May's Wolf. "Being pitted against Judge Higgins, at Kalida, in the defense of a slander suit, the Judge, who was a venerable looking man, with a pale face and hair as white as snow, closed his speech by reading with solemn voice and reverent air, several verses of the Bible, condemnatory of the tongue of the slanderer, etc. Apprehensive that it was getting to be a solemn occasion for his client, the Count slowly rose to his feet, adjusted his spectacles. elevated his nose to an angle of about forty-five degrees, and in a most clerical tone addressed himself to the Court and said : 'Your Honors, shall we sing ?' The Judges struggled until they were black in the face to comport themselves with becoming dignity, but it would not do ; judges, jurors. lawyers and spectators were convulsed with laughter, but the Count looked solemn as a funeral, while Judge Higgins' unfortunate client was being literally laughed out of court. "The Count and his son James were upon one occasion opposed to each other in a trial before the Wood County Common Pleas, of a suit brought to recover damages for deceit practiced in the sale of a horse. 378 - MEMOIRS OF LUCAS COUNTY A young gentleman of about his own age had given very damaging evidence to the younger Coffinberry's case, and for the purpose of belittling the witness, and having the jury understand that he was but an inexperienced boy, James, on cross-examination, continually addressed him as 'George,' which the Count thought unbecoming in his son, and disrespectful to his intelligent witness. Finally, James said : `George, won't you tell the Court and jury what state of flesh that horse was in ?' Whereupon the Count leaned over the table towards his son, and whispered just loud enough to be heard by everyb0dy in the court room: `Jeems, that creeter was probably in a state of horse flesh.' `Deems' subsided. "The dignity and grace of the Count, in addressing a court 0r jury, were conspicuous, and even his attitude was very marked. In the year 1840, he was the Whig candidate for the State Senate, and Col. William Sawyer, then a resident of Miamisburg, Montgomery county, was the Democratic candidate for Congress against Patrick G. Goode. It was during the famous 'hard-cider-and-log-cabin' campaign, and party spirit ran high. Colonel Sawyer, having been advertised to address a meeting at Maumee City, the friends of Mr. Coffinberry challenged Sawyer to engage in.a joint discussion, to be held at Perrysburg. Colonel Sawyer promptly accepted the challenge. The odds were unequal, as the Count, although a lawyer of acknowledged power, possessed none of the elements which form the successful politician ; while Sawyer was an old campaigner, and thoroughly posted on public measures and party issues, and on all the arts and devices of the politician. Under the arrangement, Sawyer made the opening speech. He charged upon the leaders of the Whig party that they were aristocrats, controlling the banking and moneyed interests in the country, and that their professed sympathy with the real dwellers in log cabins was a sham and a fraud. The wire-pullers of the Whig party, he said, occupied the palaces of the land, and were arrayed in purple and fine linen. (And here he gave a significant glance at the Count himself, designed to convey the intimation that he was 'one of 'em'). "'As to myself,' continued Sawyer, 'I was born in a log cabin, and I yet reside in a log cabin. My blacksmith shop. where, when at home, my circumstances compel me to severe toil about twenty hours out of the twenty-four, is a log cabin. My associations, sympathies and hopes have ever been and now are, identified with the pioneers of the country, and the occupants of log-cabins. Can my highly aristocratic friend who is to follow me in this discussion, and who resides in a lordly mansion almost within sight of this audience, say this for himself ?' "Slightly embarrassed and vexed, the Count arose, struck his characteristic 'attitude,' and commenced by deprecating the personal allusions in which his friend, Colonel Sawyer, had thought it proper to indulge. To get even with his opponent, he tossed his head back to a point that looked toward the zenith, and exclaimed, with great emphasis : `Yes, gentlemen, if There is any merit in having been born in a log cabin, I, too, Mr. Chairman, and ladies and fellow citizens, was born in a log cabin—in the first instance !" the latter part of the sentence BENCH AND BAR - 379 being one that he was accustomed to use in his opening addresses before courts and juries. This incident virtually closed the political controversy between Mr. Coffinberry and Colonel Sawyer, and, for that campaign, at least, virtually placed the former upon the retired list." DANIEL O. MORTON. Many people of Toledo, members of the bar even, will be surprised to learn that a generation before the time of M. R. Waite, Edward Bissell, Charles Kent, George R. Haynes, and other celebrated lawyers, we had a bar here that was famous throughout the state for its ability, culture and courtesy. Daniel O. Morton, the leader, was the equal, if not the superior, of any of the lawyers that have appeared on the scene since. I can remember when I was studying law, in 1869, hearing old lawyers, with a wise look and shake of the head, say : "You should have seen Daniel 0. Morton ; he was a lawyer who was a lawyer." Tradition is full of his history, yet it is strange how little of it ever was recorded. A few months ago, when the company that is preparing to publish a history of Toledo pursuaded me to act as editor, I commenced to investigate the records of this ancient bar, and, to my utter astonishment, the only mention I found of Mr. Morton, so notable in tradition, was in the following paragraph, written by Judge Doyle in his sketch of the bench and bar, and published in Waggoner's "History of Toledo." "Morton with his magnificent physique, imposing height and appearance, thorough knowledge of the law and fluent and matchless address, was the most formidable among the early lawyers ; but he was wedded to politics, his great ability was in political encounter, and he was ambitious to an extreme for political preferment." I saw that something had to be done quickly to rescue this great man's fame from oblivion. I wrote a letter to a friend of mine—Manley A. Raymond—in New York. Mr. Raymond is a nephew of Mrs. Oliver S. Bond. He studied law in my father's office in the '70's. After he was admitted to the bar, he went to New York and engaged in the practice of the law with his uncle and is today in the enjoyment of a large and lucrative practice. I wrote to him, stating the situation and asking him if he would get into communication with Levi P. Morton, a brother of Daniel O. Morton, and see if he could not dig up some of the latter's history. Levi P. Morton is one of the most interesting figures in the State of New York. Now, at the age of eighty-five, the president of the Morton Trust Company ; founder of the great banking houses of Morton, Bliss & Company, New York, and Morton, Rose & Company, London ; former governor of the State of New York, former vice-president of the United States, minister to the Requblic of France, etc. Mr. Raymond took hold of this matter, immediately and actively. He wrote to Governor Morton and received in return a personal letter. in which the Governor said he would render us all the assistance he 380 - MEMOIRS OF LUCAS COUNTY could ; and he afterward sent to Mr. Raymond the proceedings of the Toledo bar on the death of Mr. Morton. together with a sketch of his life, extracts from the remarks of attorneys, and comments of the press of Toledo and Cleveland. Later, at the request of Mr. Raymond, Governor Morton sent a photograph of his brother taken from a family portrait. It fulfills all that his most ardent admirers have said of him. The face shows the dignity, firmness and the pensive lines which we discern in the picture of the great tragedian—Macready. In due time this photograph will be copied into a life-sized oil portrait, appropriately framed, and hung in the court house in its proper place among the jurists who are dead and gone. Judge Doyle has a vivid recollection of Mr. Morton. A lawyer, by the name of Daniel S. Price, and Mr. Morton were great chums, and were in the habit, on Saturday afternoons. of playing ten pins in a bowling alley which was located in a two-story frame building, on the west side of Summit street midway between Madison and Adams, and kept by Ozro Collins. Mr. Morton retained the future judge, who was then known as "Johnny," to set up the pins for him, saying : "Now, Johnny, I want you to set up the pins for me if I lose I will give you ten cents, but if I win I will give you a quarter." Johnny stacked the pins alright, and usually got his quarter. Hon. Daniel Oliver Morton, eldest son of Rev. Daniel Oliver and Lucretia (Parsons) Morton, was born at Shoreham, Vt., Nov. 8, 1815; graduated with honor at Middlebury college, Vermont, in class of 1833, after which he entered upon the study of law in the office of Messrs. Payne & Wilson, at Cleveland, Ohio. On his admission to the bar he removed to Toledo, where he entered upon the practice of his profession, in which he early gained distinction and rose to eminence. He was appointed by President Pierce -United States Attorney for Ohio, and discharged the duties of the position for four years with ability and honor. He was one of the codifiers of the laws of Ohio under the new Constitution. Attached from early life to the old Democratic party, at the approach of the- troubles which culminated in the Civil war he at once detached himself from those who would have yielded to the claims of the secessionists and gave his influence to the support of the government, regardless of his previous party ties. In religious belief he was an Episcopalian, but, notwithstanding that fact, he was made a trustee of the old First Congregational Church when it was reorganized, March 12, 1844. His death, which occurred suddenly at Toledo, Dec. 5, 1859, was widely mourned, and the bench, bar and press of that day gave abundant testimonials of his high repute as a lawyer, citizen and man. His remains were interred in the cemetery at Toledo. The following resolutions were adopted at a meeting of the Lucas County Bar, upon the occasion of the death of Mr. Morton : "As it has seemed fit, among the decrees of Providence, to call from among the living our brother and friend, D. O. Morton, "Resolved, That, in his death we, the members of the Bar of Lucas county, and of the State of Ohio, feel we have lost a beloved and a BENCH AND BAR - 381 worthy brother and associate, an able and honorable counsellor and advocate, and a just and upright man. "Resolved, That, as citizens, we feel we have lost a public spirited, energetic and useful citizen of the State, whose labors, both public and private, have tended to the permanent welfare of the community, among whom, at an early period of his life, he chose to cast his lot and take up his abode. "Resolved, That, as his associates and friends, we deeply sympathize with his family in their present bereavement. "Resolved, That we request the Court of Common Pleas, now in session, as a mark of respect to our deceased member, to adjourn on the day of his funeral, and that we as a body will attend the funeral and wear the usual badge of mourning for thirty days. "Resolved, That a copy of these resolutions be presented to his family, and that the Court be requested to enter the same upon its records." Signed by Charles Kent, J. J. French and I. E. Lee, Committee. These resolutions were presented to the Hon. E. D. Potter, with the request that they be inscribed on the records of the court. In presenting the request of the meeting of the Bar, the chairman paid a tribute of an earnest character to the memory of the deceased. His character as a lawyer, husband, father, citizen and friend, were all feelingly and appropriately alluded to. "In seconding the request, M. R. Waite, Esq., stated that twenty years ago, when he came, the youngest member, to the Lucas county bar, there were from twenty to twenty-five practicing lawyers composing it ; of that number nine are now no more, and from being the youngest he had now become one of the five oldest members. Alluding more particularly to the death of Mr. Morton, the speaker said that this was the first time within his recollection that the bar had been called upon to mourn the loss of one of its members actively engaged in the legal duties of his profession at the time of his death. The tribute of Mr. Waite was a heartfelt and affecting one." James J. French delivered the following beautiful and eloquent address : "May it please your Honor : It seems not inappropriate that my voice, however weakly and unmelodiously, should be heard among the griefs and lamentations of this hour. It seems not only natural, but proper, that every member of this bar should come forward, at this time, to lay his tribute, however lowly, his tribute of memory and regret, upon a brother's grave. The sorrow, which hangs low and heavily upon this assembly, is common to us all. The bereavement is ours, and with its mournful presence it overshadows the ordinary current of our thoughts and lives. Death has taken one of our brotherhood from among us, and broken the circle which shall never again be reunited, and left a seat vacant which will never be refilled. "May it please your Honor : If we call to mind the character of our departed brother ; the circumstances of his thought and action and feeling ; all those circumstances which go to make up the picture of his 382 - MEMOIRS OF LUCAS COUNTY life, his mental and physical individuality ; that energy, mental and physical, which was his endowment of God, and his birthright ; which was given him to be, and was, and might still more have been, the beauty of his life ; that liberality of heart and its charities, which endeared him to his fellow-men,—not alone to the high-born and prosperous, bin, what is more significant, to those of humbler ways, and the lowly ; when we recall these and other circumstances of a life which has now laid aside its tabernacle of flesh for an immortal vesture, we behold those characteristics which win for our brother, as they will ever win for those who possess them, the love, the favor, and the approbation of his fellow men. "May it please your Honor : My acquaintance with Mr. Morton extends over but the brief period of a little better than five years. I cannot, therefore, speak in memory of him with the familiarity and understanding of those who have been his contemporaries and companions from an earlier day. But from the brief acquaintance which I had the honor to share with him, I can speak and bear faithful testimony of his virtues as a man and his abilities as a lawyer. In my estimation, and in the estimation of others whose opinions are more weighty than my own, his powers were far beyond the average allotment of nature ; and within their reach were those high attainments, professional and otherwise, which are ever considered the sufficient reward of all worthy and honorable ambition. With full perceptive faculties, readiness and courage on the one hand, and on the other a quick and clever mastery of legal analysis, he might in the fullness of his years—might he not, may it please your Honor—have attained those loftier summits of professional excellence, toward which we are all so fondly gazing, but unto which so few, alas, are destined ever to arrive ? Add to this a peculiar fascination of manner and deportment, and those attractions which true social affinities ever beget, and we may account, perhaps,- for that smile of benevolence, sympathy, and disinterestedness, which so often lighted up his swarthy features with the brightness of sunshine, but which are now placid in death and immovable, and will smile again no more forever. "'After life's fitful fever, he sleeps well.' "The world moves on, as ever, with its noise, its tumults, and its vanities. He hears them not, nor heeds them. `Thousands of throbbing hearts, while his is at rest and forever ; Thousands of aching brains, while his no longer are busy ; Thousands of toiling hands, while his have ceased from their labor : Thousands of weary feet, while his have completed their journey.' "I, therefore, may it please your Honor, join in the expressions of those, my elder and better brothers, who have preceded me in these ceremonies, and in the desire, unqualified and universal among his brethren of the bar, that these resolutions may have their place among the Records of the Court ; to this end, that the solemn observances of this day may not pass away and become soon forgotten, but remain a perpetual memorial for those who come after us and fill our seats, when we also have gone hence forever." BENCH AND BAR - 383 At the first meeting of the United States Circuit Court, after Mr. Morton's death. the United States Attorney, Hon. G. W. Belden, in behalf of the bar offered the following resolution, and moved that the court cause it to be entered upon the journal : "Whereas. It has been announced to the court that the Hon. Daniel 0. Morton departed this life on Monday last, it is, therefore, by the members of the bar of this court, "Resolved. That the mournful intelligence of the death of the Hon. Daniel 0. Morton causes in them the profoundest sorrow ; that they consider his death a great public loss ; that his many social and generous virtues—his high sense of honor, his unswerving integrity and his great learning as a lawyer, the faithful and able manner in which he has discharged many of the most important official duties for his fellow citizens—are. and must continue to be, remembered with the liveliest sensibility of regard for the deceased. That, as faint evidence of their respect for the memory of the deceased it is requested that the court will order these expressions to be entered upon the records of the court ; that, in respectful and heartfelt condolence with the widow and children of the deceased, the clerk be directed to trahsmit to them a copy of the resolution." George Willey. Esq.. seconded the resolution, and in the course of his remarks said : "He was thoroughly versed in criminal jurisprudence. He was profoundly acquainted with the legal principles pertaining to landed property. In the department of maritime law he had few equals, perhaps no superior in the State, with its elementary principles, reaching back to the earliest annals of the civil law, and with the more modern adjudications of the English and American tribunals he was alike familiar." The Toledo Daily Herald and Times alluded to him as "a gentleman universally admired for his good qualities of head and heart," and as "a lawyer of the first order of talent." The Cleveland Plain Dealer, in its editorial mention of his death, said : "As a public man. Daniel 0. Morton was able, energetic and fearlessly honest. * He believed the right was always expedient. In several respects—in boldness, in honesty and unswerving faithfulness in his friendships—he much resembled the late lamented Senator Broderick, of California." The Cleveland Daily Herald spoke of him editorially : "The deceased was a man of remarkable fine appearance, possessed polished manners, was genial, warmhearted and frank." The notice of Mr. Morton's funeral, which appeared at the head of the leading columns of the Toledo Daily Herald and Times of Dec. 9, 1859. was, in part, as follows : "Funeral of the late Hon. D. O. Morton.—Yesterday was almost universally devoted by our citizens to the funeral obsequies and paying the last tribute of respect to the remains of the illustrious departed, Daniel O. Morton. Esq. The gathering to escort the remains to the Episcopal church was large and imposing. The pallbearers were : Judge 384 - MEMOIRS OF LUCAS COUNTY Mason, Judge Potter, Judge Dunlap. Judge Myers. judge Fitch, General Hill, M. R. Waite, Esq., Daniel McBain, Esq." HIRAM WALBRIDGE. Hiram Walbridge was born at Ithaca, N. Y., Feb. 2, 1821. His father—Chester Walbridge—and his mother—Mary Walbridge—were both of New England origin, and General Walbridge, who fought at the battle of Bennington, was his ancestor. Ms parents moved to Ohio when Hiram was quite young, and at the age of eighteen he entered the Ohio University. Although of Democratic tendencies, he had from personal intercourse become warmly attached to Gen. William Henry Harrison, and he left school to go on the stump for the hero of Tippecanoe in the celebrated "hard-cider" campaign of 1840. He studied law with Judge Tilden, in Toledo, and was admitted to the bar. He was elected alderman of Toledo and, in 1844, was commissioned brigadier-general of the Ohio militia. He was a brother of the late Horace S. Walbridge, and was interested in the city of Toledo up to the day of his death. He left Toledo, in 1845, and located in the city of New York. In 1851, he visited Europe and represented the American minister, by request, at an entertainment given by the leading men of England to Kossuth, to whom General 'Walbridge presented copies of the Constitution of the United States and of Washington's farewell address. In 1853, he was elected as a representative in Congress from New York City, and he soon acquired a national reputation. He was a supporter of Stephen A. Douglass in the election of 1860, and fully sympathized with that distinguished leader's devotion to the Union. When war actually came, he succeeded in organizing the War Democracy and arraying it on the side of the Administration. He comprehended the issues involved and the real magnitude of the struggle, and at once advocated putting the country on a war footing for not less than three years, with an enrollment of 600.000 men. Experience demonstrated the wisdom of his suggestions, although but few were prepared to adopt them when they were first put forth, in May. 1861. President Lincoln, with whom he established intimate and confidential relations, acknowledged his indebtedness to General Walbridge, in a note dated Nov. 18. 1861, not only for the suggestions of largely increased forces before his own mind became convinced of their necessity, but also for first pointing out to him the strategic importance of Port Royal and Beaufort. Through the influence thus established, he secured the acceptance of ten Massachusetts regiments,• and a battery of artillery, when it was feared they might prove superfluous, and for which he afterward received public thanks. He was an effective speaker and, in the darkest-days of 1862, his voice was heard at the Cooper Institute declaring that New York would never abandon the government till, after quelling treason at home, it could present itself as a great, powerful, and united nation, capable of commanding and enforcing respect the world over. Hunt's Magazine, of January, 1866, closes an article with the following just tribute to his character : BENCH AND BAR - 385 "He is, perhaps, one of the best instances of American versatility now living. He would have made a good lawyer, but could never consent to be a pettifogger ; he would aspire to be a statesman, but would refuse to be a mere politician ; he is a merchant, but would not readily consent to transact the petty details of an insignificant business. He loves to plan on a large scale, to do things boldly, and he would rage in activity. He is jealous of his honor, and despises meanness. Possessing a large social nature, liberal, ambitious of honorable distinction, he is an earnest friend, a genial companion, and a public-spirited citizen, and active in every enterprise which he undertakes." Hiram Walbridge died Dec. 6, 1870, and his funeral took place from the family homestead at Ingleside to the cemetery of Glenwood. The body was enclosed in one of Fisk's metallic caskets, in imitation of rosewood, heavily mounted with silver and bearing the following inscription : "Hiram Walbridge, died Dec. 6, aged forty-nine years," and was placed in the saloon parlor. The lid of the coffin was one mass of flowers, the gifts of Gen. N. P. Banks and others. Hon. Horace Greeley also laid a beautiful floral testimonial at the foot of the coffin of his friend. In the same room was a full-length likeness of the deceased, taken in the crimson flush of his hopeful and brilliant life. At o'clock, the order of ceremonies began by the entrance from an adjacent room into the one where the corpse was lying of the following pall-bearers : General Sherman, Horace Greeley, Secretary Boutwell, Senators Nye, Wilson and Fenton, Speaker Blaine, General Butler, Judge Casey, Representatives Banks and Peck, and Collector Murphy, of New York. The President, Cabinet and pall-bearers, together with the family and relatives of the deceased, were seated in a kind of semicircle in the saloon parlor, at the head of which, near appropriately draped tables, stood the officiating clergyman, Rev. Mr. Buck, pastor of Rock Creek church, and Rev. Dr. Samson. Mr. Buck read the beautiful service for the dead of the Episcopal church, and was followed by Dr. Samson. EMERY D. POTTER. Emery D. Potter was the first lawyer to open an office in Toledo and was still here in full vigor when all of his brethren had passed away. He was born in Providence, R. I., in October, 1804, the son of Abraham Potter, a farmer. He studied law with John A. Dix and Abner Cook, Jr., at Cooperstown, N. Y. In the fall of 1835, he came to Toledo. He was elected presiding judge of this district, then consisting of ten counties, riding through the wilderness on horseback, frequently swimming the swollen streams. In 1843, he was elected by the Democratic party to Congress, overcoming a Whig majority of 600. Clay, Webster and Calhoun were then in the Senate, launching their thunders, pro and con, on the right of secession. Mr. Potter's presence was immediately felt, and he was a member of the most important committees. He was re-elected, in 1848, and received seventy-eight votes for speaker. In 1846, he was mayor of the city of Toledo. 386 - MEMOIRS OF LUCAS COUNTY While traveling on the circuit, he frequently stopped at a famous tavern in a little village called Texas, just inside the boundary of Henry county, where it then joined Lucas—before the creation of Fulton county—on the ,banks of the Maumee river and the Wabash & Erie canal. Members of the Supreme Court, holding court in the surrounding counties, and lawyers throughout the State, practicing on the circuit, would make Texas their headquarters while trying law suits in the Northwest. They came in out of the swamp on horseback with their law libraries in their saddle bags. They came from Cleveland, San-, dusky, Upper Sandusky, Columbus and as far away as Cincinnati. I remember visiting this deserted village some years ago, with the Tile Club. We gaily sailed away in a canal boat, drawn by two horses. Osthaus, Bang, Stine, George Stevens, Will Ketcham, Parkhurst. Chamberlain, William Currier, Arthur Hitchcock and others brought back some artistic souvenirs. I remember the long vistas of the Maumee, the quiet spots under the willows on the canal, the hay fields. meadows, etc. I remember one by Arthur Hitchcock and the village blacksmith shop. It was a gem and hung for a long time in the foyer of the Valentine, and it is still in the possession of George H. Ketcham. A number of us were walking by the ruins of the old tavern, one evening, when Will Ketcham ascended the steps, took .off his hat and, in the moonlight, looking a veritable ghost of the old time, bowed courteously and, waving his hand to the building, said : "Step inside, gentlemen : there is a wine supper inside." Instantly we were transported back half a century, the old tavern was rehabilitated and illuminated, and we could hear the sounds of revelry. Men visited this lawyer's exchange whose voices have shaken the nation. Corwin, the elder Ewing, and William Stanbery, who practiced through the entire circuit of the State, must have been familiar figures at this famous hostelry. William Stanbery, familiarly known as "Old Bill" Stanbery. was of colossal stature and of colossal character. He lacked the refinement of his distinguished brother, Henry Stanbery. of Cincinnati. but made up for it in rugged intellectual strength. Those old giants did not cite authorities ; they despised them. They knew Coke, Chitty and Blackstone by heart and had the law reduced to a science. Their argument was in logic as irresistible as a piece of adamant. "Bill" Stanbery came into Mt. Vernon one day when court was in session on the circuit. Some one asked him if he was attending court. "No," he said. "in the old time a law suit was a gladiatorial contest, in which intellect won in establishing the great principles of jurisprudence : now some 5x6 lawyer hunts up an act of a one-hoss legislature or a decision by a Western ignoramus, calling himself a judge. and knocks you, out. The last time I was here Hosmer Curtis was trying a case that involved a log chain ; when I left he had been speaking two days and had only got to the third link." On one occasion he was trying a case against a Young lawyer. In the evening the bar was gathered at the tavern for the customary rest BENCH AND BAR - 387 and recreation, not to say conviviality. The young lawyer, however, spent the night in looking up the authorities and came into court in the morning loaded to the guards. After firing his ordnance and blowing, up Stanbery's case, the old man arose, white with wrath, and, pointing the finger of scorn at him said : "You young whipper-snapper, while your brethren of the bar, after the labors of the day, are engaged in social intercourse and the exchange of those amenities that are so becoming to our noble profession, you sneak off and spend the night hunting precedents to overturn the great principles of jurisprudence." Mr. Stanbery was not very punctual about paying his debts. In those days a man could be arrested for debt. On one occasion, when he was ascending the court house steps, the sheriff, who had just been inducted into office, touched him on the shoulder and served him with a summons and a warrant. "Old Bill" froze him with a look and told him to step into the court room and he would attend to his ease. He sat down at a table and, with a heavy frown, commenced drawing up what looked like a portentous document. The sheriff, in the meanwhile, Dale and trembling, awaited to hear his fate. Stanbery affixed the great seal of the State of Ohio, and told the sheriff to stand up while he read the article, reciting, "That William Stanbery, an attorney-at-law and officer of the court of the great State of Ohio, while engaged in the practice of his profession, had been wantonly and maliciously arrested on the steps of the court house, in violation of the Constitution and in contempt of the majesty of the great State of Ohio." The sheriff by this time was pretty nearly dissolved. He assured the indignant lawyer that he did not understand the fatal consequences of his act and that if he would let him off this time he would never make such a mistake again. Mr. Stanbery told him that on account of his dense ignorance he would overlook his flagrant violation of legal prerogatives. The following is from Knapp's History of the Maumee Valley. page 315 :— "Each term of court in Wood county was a carnival of fun for the lawyers. The presiding judge and circuit lawyers always put up at Spafford's Exchange, where the Judge [Potter] occupied habitually the best sleeping room in the house, a capacious apartment in the northwest corner, over the barroom, to which the lawyers resorted nightly for a social time. The Count [Coffinberry], Spink and Way were the chief actors. Way was not naturally humorous, but the Count and Spink had a way of playing about and making him funny in spite of himself, and the three constituted a capital theatrical stock company, including the orchestra in which the Count represented the bassoon, Spink the violin and Way the trombone, while the Judge would act as stage manager. These entertainments were the most brilliant and hilarious (luring the time that our friend, Judge Potter, presided over the circuit. The Judge always preserved inviolate his dignity on the bench, but, like a popular schoolmaster, would play with the boys out of school hours, and joined heartily in the laughs which his rare fund of humor always produced. The Judge sometimes opened the entertainment by singing his favorite song of "Lord Lovel," which was always received with 388 - MEMOIRS OF LUCAS COUNTY tremendous applause, and the encore was frequently responded to by "Rosin the Bow," in which he was inimitable. Judge Potter died at Toledo, Ohio, Feb. 3, 1896, at the age of ninety-two, and he left surviving him E. D. Potter, Jr., and Claire Potter, his children, and Paul E. Potter, Roland D. Potter and Mrs. J. H. Frambach (nee Mary L. Potter), his grandchildren. MORRISON R. WAITE. (From the History of the Supreme Court of the United States, by Hampton L. Carson, of the Philadelphia bar ; by permission of the Lawyers' Cooperative Publishing Co., Rochester, N. Y.) Morrison Remick Waite was born at Lyme, Conn., Nov. 29, 1816. He graduated from Yale in the year 1837, at the age of twenty-two, numbering among his classmates William M. Evarts, Benjamin Silliman and Samuel J. Tilden. During the following year, he read law in the office of his father, traveled extensively, and then, with the boldness of the pioneer, removed to Ohio, where he completed his legal studies with Samuel M. Young, in Maumee City. In 1839, he was admitted to the bar and formed a partnership with his preceptor, proving himself capable of grasping the minute details of legal controversy and of applying the principles of legal science to facts as they arose. Although devoting himself with singular fidelity to his profession. "the pupil of patient merit rather than the disciple of ambition," nothing of special importance occurred to distinguish his practice, which grew steadily from year to year. In 1850, he removed to Toledo, and there established a law firm, of which his youngest brother, Richard, became a partner. In the meantime, the elder brother became widely known for his successful management of difficult cases, his studious habits and uprightness of character. Although devoid of brilliant talents, he had many opportunities of entering public life, all of which he declined.* but he became, in a certain sense, the recognized leader of the Ohio bar—a position which he maintained for more than thirty years. Originally an admirer of Henry Clay and a Whig in politics, when that party disbanded he became a Republican, and was a strong supporter of the policy of Mr. Lincoln's administration. Although urged to accept a nomination for Congress he declined,* and also twice re- * Mr. Carson errs in hiS statements that Mr. Waite declined all "opportunities of entering public life" and that, "although urged to accept a nomination for Congress, he declined." Mr. Waite's political life was an exceedingly active one. He was first a candidate for public office in 1846, as the Whig nominee for Congress. his opponent, William Sawyer, being elected. In 1849, he was chosen as representative to the State legislature. He was a candidate for delegate to the State Constitutional Convention, in 1850, but failed of an election. In 1852, he served as a member of the Toledo City Council, and in 1862, he was again a candidate for Congress, supported by those who were opposed to the radical anti-slavery views of James M. Ashley, who, however, was elected, defeating Mr. Waite by a close vote. BENCH AND BAR - 389 fused a seat upon the Supreme Bench of Ohio. The only office he had held was, in 1849, when he served a single term as a member of the legislature. Simple in his habits, modest, unpretending and studious, a plain but strong man, a solid and substantial common-law lawyer, bred of common-law ancestors, he first became known to the nation when selected by President Grant, in 1871, to represent the United States at Geneva before the Tribunal of Arbitration of the Alabama Claims, under the terms of the Treaty of Washington. Notwithstanding the distinguished reputations of his colleagues—Caleb Cushing and William M. Evarts—his argument in reply to Sir Roundell Palmer, establishing the liability of the English government for permitting the Confederate cruisers to be supplied with coal in British ports during the Civil war, attracted widespread attention for its clear, forcible and succinct presentation of the facts and the robust and direct logic by which he carried conviction upon all points. Upon his return, he quietly resumed his practice, and, in 1873, was sent by both political parties as a delegate to the Ohio Constitutional Convention, of which he was immediately chosen President. From this station he was unexpectedly summoned to be the Chief Justice of the nation. He more than satisfied expectation. His remarkable administrative ability, his steadfast fidelity to legal truth, his sagacity and wisdom, his careful observance of all matters necessary to the successful conduct of his office, his dignity and firmness, his attention to arguments, his habit of viewing all questions in the clear dry light of reason, his promptness in the dispatch of business, and his inflexible integrity, not only won the respect, but commanded the confidence of the country. His personal appearance harmonized with his intellectual and moral endowments. A short, compact, but robust figure, a massive head set squarely upon shoulders of unusual breadth, a mouth unyielding in its outlines, an eye determined in its glance, yet kindly in its light, a voice rich and deep, a step deliberate but firm—these fairly indicated the character of the man. His judicial style was clear and terse, and some of his most celebrated judgments are remarkable for vigor and brevity. Indulging but little in illustration or ornament, with no trace of passion save when his soul burned with righteous anger over the crime of polygamy, he worked out his results with calmness, and sustained his conclusions with abundaht and convincihg reasons. In 1876, he refused to be a candidate for the Presidency, and in the following year declined to serve as a member of the Electoral Commission. At the time of his death he was one of the Peabody trustees c f Southern education, and had been an earnest advocate of Congressional aid to schools for the education of Southern negroes. He visited Europe in the summer of 1887, was entertained by Lord Chief Justice Coleridge, and in London was the guest of Lord Bramwell, Lord Fitzgerald and Baron Huddleston. The London Law Times expressed the universal regret that the English bar had been unable to give so high and honored a personage an official welcome, but as he visited London in the middle of the long vacation, a public ceremony in the Temple was 390 - MEMOIRS OF LUCAS COUNTY impracticable. His visit, like that of his predecesscr, Ellsworth. impressed those whom he met with the simplicity of character but rugged strength of an American Chief Justice. So temperately, judiciously and firmly did he discharge his official duties at a trying period in a region still agitated by the throes of war, that after his death the members of the bar of South Carolina, assembled at Circuit, expressed their sense of his impartiality during the days of Reconstruction, and of his friendliness of manner. "Fortunate indeed," said one, "that there was a man who, amidst the furious passions that rent the country and shook the land, could hold in his steady and equal hand the balance of justice undisturbed." At Circuit his manners were dignified, graceful and winning, but unassuming. Though genial, his bearing commanded respect, and his private character was pure and noble. As a presiding officer he was a model of deportment, and exceedingly urbane. No disorder or levity was ever attempted in his presence. Yale College conferred upon him the degree of LL.D. in 1872, Kenyon College in 1874, and the University of Ohio in 1879. REMINISCENCES. In the summer of 1869, my father and Frank H. Hurd came to Toledo, organized the firm of Scribner & Hurd, and opened an office in the Drummond Block, on the corner of St. Clair and Madison streets. At that time the Drummond Block had just been completed and was the finest office building in Toledo. The site of the Boody House was a, vacant lot, covered with water ; of the Produce Exchange, a brick house with trees in front, that had been the residence of D. 0. Morton, but was then used for a boarding house. Where the Chamber of Commerce stands was an old two-story frame house with a veranda used as a billiard hall. The Hartford Block; on the corner of Summit and Madison, had been the office building of the town, occupied by such lawyers as M. R. Waite, Charles Pratt, John R. Osborn, etc. I had grown up in Mount Vernon, an insular town of perhaps 5,000 people. Toledo had at that time 30,000. Real estate was advancing rapidly. In many parts of the city it would have sold for more than it would today. I remember distinctly the excitement, the hustle and booming condition things were in here at that time. I walked up the steps of the Drummond Block and looked at the windows of frosted glass on the doors of the offices, decorated in bright colors, with pictures of fruits and flowers, in a sort of trance. M. R. Waite occupied the southeast corner, and immediately opposite him was John R. Osborn. Beyond John R. Osborn, on the same side of the hall, was E. D. Potter, Jr., then a young man just commencing the practice. He held forth in a very small office that was afterward occupied by Gilbert Harmon and later by E. W. Tolerton. Across from Mr. Potter's office were two offices—one on each side of the stairway, connected by a small room extending over the stairway —that were occupied by Hill & Pratt—Charles W. Hill and Charles BENCH AND BAR - 391 Pratt. The office immediately east of this was occupied by B. W. Rouse, at one time city solicitor and afterward judge of our Court of Common Pleas. In the southeast corner were Kent, Newton & Pugsley. Isaac Pugsley at that time was quite a young barrister and had just gone into the firm of Kent & Newton. Haynes & Price—George G. Haynes and Major Price—occupied the office at the rear of King's Block, corner of Summit and Madison streets. In the northeast corner, next to Kent, Newton & Pugsley's office, Scribner & Hurd opened an office. I believe they paid $25 a month, which they thought was something dreadful. They put down a carpet of coarse matting, much to the disgust of Charles Kent, who said he didn't believe in turning a law office into a ladies' parlor. Their example, however, was followed by the other lawyers, and today the average law offices are carpeted with Brussels carpets, the walls decorated and hung with pictures of celebrated lawyers. I commenced the study of the law in the office of Scribner & Hurd, in September, 1869, and naturally went frequently to the court house. The bar at that time was represented by such men as M. R. Waite, Charles Kent, Charles Scribner, John T. Newton, Edward Bissell, William Baker, John C. Lee, J. M. Ritchie, James J. French, Ira Lee, and young men, such as Frank H. Hurd, E. D. Potter, Jr., John H. Doyle and Isaac P. Pugsley. They usually went Monday mornings, to attend the call of the docket and listen to decisions. Probably at no time in the history of the bar have we had as many lawyers of eminent ability an,. distinguished character in proportion to 'the number. They were a picturesque body, distinguished by courtly manners and an old fashioned courtesy, the most of which has passed away. The dignity of the bar and its absolutely spotless honor was the polar star of every one of them and they never missed an opportunity to impress their sentiments on the young members. Their example and influence is felt to this day. It is delightful to recall the extreme courtesy and respect they paid each other. My father and Mr. Hurd had grown up in Mt. Vernon, under the refining influence of Kenyon College, and such lawyers as Judge Rollin C. Hurd, who was one of the ablest lawyers and noblest of men ; Columbus Delano and Joseph Vance ; and coming in frequent contact with Allen G. Thurman, Rufus P. Ranney and Thomas Ewing, the elder of the famous Lancaster bar, and they. of course were at home with the lawyers of Lucas, who were pretty nearly, if not fully, the equals of the lawyers I have mentioned. Some of the lawyers who came at that time to this growing and ambitious city had not, however, had the benefit of such benign influences. I remember one in particular, an eminent man at a rural bar, where it was considered proper to take advantage of any situation or technicality, and engage in what is known as "sharp practice." He had filed a petition in our Common Pleas Court that was in default for answer. M. R. Waite was attorney for the defense. It was the custom then, as it is now, as a matter of courtesy, to give the lawyer for the defense, in cases that were to be litigated, a reasonable time after default 392 - MEMOIRS OF LUCAS COUNTY to answer. The case would not be tried for a long time to come, and no harm would be done to anyone. But this lawyer had been trained at a bar where it was customary to take immediate and decisive advantage of a default, which was a good custom in some respects, as it induced lawyers to promptness in filing their pleadings and keeping their business in ship shape. This lawyer had recently come to Toledo, and was anxious to make a reputation. He called the attention of the court, Judge Fitch, to the fact that the defendant was in default and demanded a judgment. Mr. Waite pleaded his numerous engagements and lack of time to prepare his answer, and asked the court to fix a time in which he might answer. The attorney for the plaintiff made a loud and vociferous argument, and insisted that the statute gave him his default as a matter of right, and the court could do nothing else but give it to him. The bar was taken aback by this novel proposition and the court interposed, saying that it was not customary here to take advantage of an attorney who was in default on account of a pressure of ,business, and suggested that counsel should give his adversary a little more time. But the attorney was quite obdurate and insistent. In the meantime, Mr. Waite had looked over the petition and discovered a fatal defect, to which he called the court's attention. He was entitled to have the case dismissed and throw the costs on plaintiff's client, but very graciously permitted him to take leave to amend his pleadings, securing for himself all the time he wanted and setting a good example to his adversary and the bar. At that time, Baker & Collins—William Baker and judge Collins—had their office in the Hartford Block. Lemmon & Seney—R. C. Lemmon and Joshua R. Seney—were in the adjoining Anderson Block : both of them afterwards were judges on the Common Pleas bench. David H. Commager and Charles H. Lemmon were students in their office. James M. Ritchie and Judge Howe—Ritchie & Howe—and Charles Dodge were down in Lenk's Block. Bissel & Gorrel had the second floor of the First National Bank Building, with John H. Doyle, Wesley S. Thurstin and Judge Millard on the staff, and Thomas H. Tracy and perhaps some others as students. Alfred W. Gleason had charge of the real estate end of their firm, which the lawyers called the corporation. In the week immediately before Christmas, 1869. the case of the State of Ohio vs. Philip Steinmetz was tried. Steinmetz was indicted for murder in the first degree of a man by the name of August Heck. Steinmetz and Heck were neighbors, and lived near the corner of Wakeman and Bancroft streets. They had a quarrel about a cow getting into one or the other's garden. Steinmetz had assaulted Heck, and the latter had him arrested and tried before the police court. After the trial. Steinmetz made some remark to the effect that he would get even with Heck. That night, after Heck had gone to bed, he heard the report of a gull or pistol and got out of bed to see what was the matter. He went to a window, threw up the curtain, and received a load of buckshot that caused his death within a short time. The police were notified and commenced an immediate investigation. They found an old shotgun in Steinmetz's stable, hid under some corn stalks in the manger ; that Steinmetz had BENCH AND BAR - 393 gone home, thrown the clothes partly off of his bed, but had not gone to bed a part of the wadding unrolled disclosed a piece of a German newspaper, and fitted into a newspaper they found in Steinmetz's home. Some of the buckshot picked up in Heck's home corresponded with others they found in a bureau drawer in Steinmetz's house. They traced Steinmetz to the home of a friend on Ten-Mile creek. He was not in the house when the police arrived. They found him, however, concealed in a cornfield, and brought him back to Toledo. No one saw Steinmetz fire the gun, but the circumstantial evidence was practically conclusive. James Kent Hamilton, better known as Kent Hamilton, was the prosecuting attorney of Lucas county at that time. This being a very important case, he had retained Charles Kent to assist him. Steinmetz was defended by James M. Ritchie and Henry E. Howe. At that time the entire floor in the third story of the old court house, with the exception of the entrance way and witness room and the jury room, was the court room. It was afterward divided into three rooms to accommodate the two additional judges allowed us by the legislature. The court room was packed with men and women, attracted by what was then unusual—the trial of a murder case. Steinmetz sat at the table, with his faithful and devoted wife, taking a lively interest in the testimony, but apparently not affected by it. Judge Howe at that time was a young man, tall, straight and slender, with sandy whiskers and pleasing personality. The only thing at this late date I can remember him sayihg was that this was an occasion that every member of the jury would remember until the day of his death. He held the respectful and breathless attention of the jury during his argument, and certainly awakened all the milk of human kindness in their breasts and their profound commiseration for the fate of his client. Kent Hamilton opened the case for the prosecution and made a powerful and dramatic plea, in which he dwelt on the fact that the circumstantial evidence pointed unerringly and certainly to Steinmetz's guilt. With a burst of eloquence he exclaimed : "You are as certain that Steinmetz killed Heck as you would be if Heck came out of his grave before you, with all his bloody wounds, and told you that Steihmetz was his murderer." Judge Ritchie followed Judge Howe. He was then, as he is today, tall and straight, with an elegant figure. graceful and courtly manners. He impressed on the jury the fact that they were to treat Steinmetz as being absolutely innocent. and to so regard him until the prosecution had torn way every shred of doubt and he stood before them guilty beyond any question. He then took up the different circumstances, one at a time, and asked the jury if that proved his client's guilt. For instance, he would say. Steinmetz quarreled with Heck about a cow that got into his garden. "Does that prove that he killed Heck ? Steinmetz 'was arrested on complaint of Heck. Does that prove that he was the murderer ? It was Steinmetz's gun that did the deadly work. Is that any evidence that Steinmetz was the man that fired the gun ?" He reminded them that no living witness had seen Steinmetz shoot Heck, and then called their attention to a number of celebrated cases where the 394 - MEMOIRS OF LUCAS COUNTY circumstantial evidence was practically conclusive, in some instances so overwhelming that the accused parties were convinced and confessed their guilt, and yet, after they had been executed, subsequent events had disclosed their innocence. His voice was musical, his manner gentle and persuasive. When he concluded you could have heard a pin drop. He had the sympathy of the audience and the jury. There was a gleam of hope for Steinmetz. Charles Kent closed for the prosecution. He was short, thick set, broad shouldered, a strong, rugged face and an iron jaw. The very personification of an irresistible force. His hair was awry and disturbed from a habit he had of running his hand through it. He arose amid perfect silence, and from the commencement to the close of his speech he practically read Steinmetz's death warrant. He said : "Judge Ritchie has done just what I would have done in his place. He has taken the strands of this evidence, one by one, and broken them in the presence of the jury. I propose to bind them together and," turning and pointing to the prisoner, he exclaimed dramatically, "they will make a rope that will hang you, Philip Steinmetz." As I remember it, Christmas came on Sunday. The jury went out the day before and brought in their verdict guilty of murder in the first degree, shortly after 12 o'clock on Christmas morning. What a Christmas for Steinmetz and the widow of Heck ! The prisoner was sentenced to be hanged, but when the day of execution arrived Judge Ritchie had persuaded Rutherford B. Haves, who was then Governor of Ohio, to commute his sentence to imprisonment for life. He died in the penitentiary after a confinement of thirty years. His wife never ceased to the day of his death in her efforts to procure him a pardon. On Saturday, April 9, 1871, General Hill called on my father and retained him to assist him in the trial of the case of Gribben against Gribben. Charles Dodge, one of the counsel for the defendant, was detained at home by sickness in his family, and General Hill requested my father to take his place. The case involved 160 acres of land, worth about $15,000. The retainer was a Godsend to my father, for he had just come to Toledo, had a large family on his hands, and was waiting an opportunity to show the people what he could do and secure his share of the business. In 1842, Neil Gribben had come to Toledo and lived for a time at a tavern kept by his brother, Peter Gribben. He was taken sick there and died. Before he died he made a deed, as agent for his brother, Hugh, to Peter Gribben and John Gribben, of the land mentioned, for a consideration named in the deed of $1,000. Within two or three years afterward John Gribben deeded his interest in the land to his brother, Peter, for $25. In this suit, brought by Hugh Gribben against the widow and heirs of Peter, it was claimed that the deed to Peter was fraudulent ; that it was not drawn until after Neil had died and was then signed by someone putting a pen and penholder into the hand of the dead man and signing it. All the witnesses but one, who attested the deed, and John Gribben, one of the grantees, had died. The case had been tried in the common pleas court. Lee & French, M. R. Waite and William Baker BENCH AND BAR - 395 appeared for the plaintiff and Charles W. Hill and Charles Dodge for the defendant. John Gribben and one witness to the deed, H. A. Faxon. swore positively that Neil Gribben, who had a power of attorney from Hugh Gribben, his brother, was dead, and that the attorney who drafted the deed had taken the dead man's hand, put a penholder and pen into it and signed his name to it, John's excuse being that at the time he was a boy and under the influence of his brother, Peter. No evidence but the deed was offered by the defendant. Judgment was rendered for the plaintiff, the deed ordered canceled and the defendant directed to make a deed to plaintiff. The case was taken to the district court on appeal, and on a Saturday evening, General Hill brought the papers to my father, stated to him the points in the case and requested him to assist in the trial, which would come off on the following Monday. My father put in Sunday studying the papers. On Monday the case came up for trial before the old District Court, composed of the Common Pleas judges of the eastern end of the district. John Gribben and H. A. Faxon, the only living witnesses to the deed, swore positively that Neil Gribben was dead at the time the deed was executed, and that the attorney who drafted the deed guided the dead man's hand when he signed it. The defendant offered the deed in evidence and rested. My father in his argument called the attention of the court to the fact that in the deed the name -Neil" was always written "Niel," and even on the back of the deed the endorsement was "Niel ;" all of this was written by the lawyer whom the witnesses said signed the deed, and the only place where the name was spelled right was where it was signed ; that the lawyer who drafted the deed did not know how to spell the maker's name, but that Neil Gribben knew how to spell his own name, and the signature was therefore Neil Gribben's. This argument won, and the farm remained in the possession of the widow and the children. The lawyer of those days was quite different from the lawyer of the present day. The lawyer of the present day is a mixed business man and lawyer. The law is incidental to business. In those days the lawyer was a lawyer pure and simple. He had thoroughly mastered Blackstone and Kent, was grounded in the principles of the law, in pleading and evidence, and reduced the practice of the law to a science. The business of the law and the money made in the law was entirely secondary. The winning of lawsuits, the establishment of principles, the triumphs of the forum were the attractions of the old-time lawyer. When a case was called for trial in those days the attorneys on the respective sides had examined every phase of the case, sounded all the depths of the law applicable to it, knew their adversary's side of the case as well as their own, realized at once the full effect of every question and answer as soon as they were uttered. The judges also had made a study of the case and were prepared to decide questions as they arose. The contest was a struggle of skilled gladiators. The direct examination followed a certain definite line. Every question had been decided beforehand and the lawyer knew just what questions would be objected to, and was prepared with 396 - MEMOIRS OF LUCAS COUNTY his law to argue the objection. No unnecessary questions were asked. and when the preliminary examination was ended the counsel had put his last question. I have often watched my father in the cross-examination of witnesses. It seemed to me like an expert playing a game of billiards. He would group his questions and separate them, as the billiard player does the balls, leading the witness unconsciously from place to place, keeping on the best of terms with him until he had made his point. In the examination of the witnesses he always kept on the utmost good terms with the court. If an objection to a question was made he would argue it good-naturedly and as persuasively as he could. Should the court decide against him he would bow his acquiescence, say that perhaps the court was right, but that it was an interesting question, and he would like to preserve it, to which the court would bow graciously, leaving the jury to think that somehow the court was with my father, when, in fact, it was dead against him. Charley Kent was just the opposite of my father. He was rough, exacting and decisive. When he cross-examined a witness he was like a butcher cutting. up a beef ; when he finished, the witness was properly drawn and quartered and the parts hung in their proper places. In 1879, the firm of Scribner, Hurd & Scribner was retained, with Kent, Newton & Pugsley, to defend a suit brought by Upton McLain to collect a note made by Henry Brand to Ernest Greiner, some time in the sixties, for $2,000. The claim, with interest, amounted to $4,000. Some time in the sixties, Ernest Greiner was treasurer of Lucas county. There was a large deficiency in the county treasury and had been through several administrations. When leading politicians wanted a little money, they simply threw their checks into the treasury and got it. When officers of the State examined the funds in the treasury they counted these checks as cash. One day in the sixties, Peter Lenk met Henry Brand on Summit street and asked him to loan him his check for $2,000 for a few days, when he would return it to him. They stepped into the Columbia saloon, and Brand made his individual check on the Second National Bank for $2,000, to the order of Ernest Greiner, who was then county treasurer, gave it to Lenk. and in a short time forgot all about it. The check was considered as cash by the examiners of the treasury selected for that purpose. Lenk neglected to return the check and it turned up fourteen years afterward, among the assets of the old city bank, and was taken possession of by Upton McLain as receiver for the bank. The claim was made that the check was personal property of Ernest Greiner. The case was managed very ably for the plaintiff by John F. Kumler. Charles Kent cross-examined Greiner, and it was a masterpiece. He developed the fact that at the time this check was made Greiner lived in a rented house, had no property, real or personal, of any kind. That the cost of his living had always been equal, if not more. than his salary, and finally asked him where this $2,000 came from, and he was compelled to admit that he did not know. The verdict was necessarily for the defendant. While Kent was rough, sarcastic, and a terror to witnesses and BENCH AND BAR - 397 those opposing him, to those who knew him intimately he had the simplicity and affection of a child. He was perfectly guileless, incapable of deviating a hair's breadth from the truth. Once he learned a fact was against him, he refused to make any claim on account of it. reconstructed his case and proceeded on the facts as he understood them. If facts really in his favor were in doubt, by a sort of intuition and inspiration he arrived at the truth, and demonstrated it with such force and clearness as carried conviction, even to his adversaries. All in all, he was probably as great a lawyer as our country has ever produced. In a business way he had not a particle of ability, but was fortunate enough to receive a farm as a fee when land was cheap. This farm, located on Collingwood avenue, near Baldwin Heights, extending back to Maplewood, belongs to his daughter, his sole remaining heir, and is worth a small fortune. The old-time judges—Rouse, Lemmon, Collins, French and Lockwood—were grounded in English history, Blackstone and Kent, and had a wholesome and reverent regard for the right of trial by jury, won for us from King John in Magna Charta and established in the Constitution of England, the United States and the several states. To take a case from a jury Was a rare thing in those days and was only done when the facts were so clearly proved that no fair man would dispute them, and the facts so proved made a clear case on the law for the interposition of the court. Those old judges never took into consideration what the reviewing court might do, but decided cases as they thought they should be decided and as though they were a court of final resort, satisfied with the approval of their own consciences, conscious that if they were reversed they might still be right, and that in the course of the rolling years the reviewing courts might see their error and the reversed decision be recognized as sound, and become the law of the land. In these respects some of our modern judges would do well to imitate their example. For years railroad corporations had a habit of going through the country, taking rights of way without leave or license, compelling the property owners to go into court to secure compensations for their land and then fighting them, neglecting to build fences in violation of the law, killing cattle and forcing the owners into law suits to secure what was coming to them, and so exasperated the people that it was impossible for a railroad corporation to get a fair trial from a jury. The judges in our federal court had usually been corporation lawyers and were naturally prejudiced against jury trials. From this prejudice grew up the custom of taking cases from the jury, in which the federal judge frequently invaded the citizen's right to a trial by jury. The example set by the federal judges has been followed by some of our younger Common Pleas judges. This prejudice has died out, and today, I believe a railroad corporation can get a fair trial by a jury. Even in my father's time, it was no uncommon thing for a jury in a personal injury case to render a verdict in favor of a corporation. Our Circuit Court of Appeals and our own Circuit Court have seen the error of the lower courts in this respect, and by reversing 398 - MEMOIRS OF LUCAS COUNTY their decisions are bringing them back to a proper recognition of the sacred right of a trial by jury. In 1871, the old District Court sent here and appointed a committee —I think of seven members—to examine applicants for membership. to the bar. Gen. Charles W. Hill was chairman of the committee. He announced to the bar that the examination would be held in his office, in the evening. Early that evening a large class of would-be young barristers were promptly on hand, very nervous and anxious. James M. Hueston, Angus McIntosh, David H. Commager and the writer, of Toledo, and a number of applicants from Napoleon and other suburban towns were among the number. The applicants from outside of Toledo were anxious to be examined first so that they could return home, and we, of Toledo, were perfectly willing they should be. General Hill conducted the examination, and the questions he asked of those poor fellows from Napoleon and outside towns would have caused Coke to lie down and given Blackstone a fit. The law a student learns, reading law, and the law a lawyer acquires, practicing it, are two entirely different things. General Hill's questions were drawn from cases that he had tried and been settled by the Supreme Court. The first man examined listened to the questions, helplessly and in dismay, and finally admitted that he did not know anything about the law. The committee agreed with him and recommended him to try it again. McIntosh, Hueston, Commager and I decided that we did not want to be examined by that committee, at any rate not that night. The next morning we got together and held a council of war. Any three of the committee were authorized to make an examination. We agreed that George R. Haynes, General Lee and James J. French would make a very desirable examining committee. Hueston was studying law with General Lee, McIntosh with George R. Haynes, and James J. French and I were on the very best of terms. Hueston went to General Lee and told him that he would like to be examined that morning and that two members of the committee would be right over to examine us. McIntosh requested Mr. Haynes—afterward Judge Haynes—and I requested Mr. French—afterward Judge French—to go over to General Lee's office and make the examination. These gentlemen were in full sympathy with us and gave us a very easy and pleasant examination, after which they certified that they had examined us and that in their judgment we were qualified to practice law, and we were duly admitted and enrolled, to our own immense satisfaction. Angus McIntosh practiced a few years and died, very suddenly. He was of Scotch descent, had a fresh face, was very animated, of an affectionate disposition, a good comrade, and a thoroughly practical and conscientious lawyer. At the time of his death he was advancing rapidly in his profession, was quite popular and very much beloved by the bar. James M. Hueston was quite prominent in politics, a member of the Democratic party, a good mixer. He was elected prosecuting attor- BENCH AND BAR -399 ney and served the county with distinguished ability up to the time of his death. David H. Commager was elected judge of our Common Pleas court, in the fall of 1883, and occupied that position until 1888. He followed closely in the steps of his predecessors ; he was democratic in his administration of the law and sympathized with the poor and oppressed. He had a wholesome respect for the right of trial by jury and the writ of habeas corpus. He did not rule in favor of a corporation for the purpose of protecting himself against a reversal by the upper courts, on the theory that the jury would take care of the plaintiff anyway, as is too frequently done. He gave the corporations all that was coming to them, and at the same time impressed on the jury all the considerations that were due the adverse party. This may account for the number of large verdicts rendered against corporaticns, in favor of widows and crippled men, during Judge Commager's administration. Clarence Brown came into our office in the early seventies—I think in 1873. He finished up studies and was admitted to the bar. In 1874, Frank H. Hurd, who was the city solicitor, made him his assistant. He was also assistant for Tames Kent Hamilton, who succeeded Mr. Hurd, in 1875, and of J. C. Chamberlin, who succeeded Mr. Hamilton, in 1879, and held the office until 1881. During these years he looked after the details of the solicitor's office, prepared the cases, drafted the legislation, and largely shared the responsibilities with his chief. In 1881, he was undoubtedly the best equipped lawyer in Toledo to take care of its legal business. The Republican party recognized this and nominated him for city solicitor, in 18.81. According to a time-honored custom, the convention called upon him for a speech. In beautifully modulated tones, he gracefully, modestly and eloquently expressed his gratitude for the honor, and said among other things that it would be his effort and ambition to see that no harm came to the city. His predecessors and nearly all of his successors have obeyed that injunction, but none more religiously and faithfully than Clarence Brown. When Samuel M. Jones was a candidate for mayor, the second time, before the Republican convention, he was defrauded of the nomination by machine politicians. Mr. Brown advocated Mr. Jones' reelection, as an independent candidate, in an impassioned appeal that will be remembered by every person who listened to him. It would compare very favorably with the ringing speeches of the spellbinders during the war. He prepares his cases thoroughly, has his course clearly marked out, and follows it with so much energy and dash that Ile is a good lawyer who can head him off. He served the city one term of two years-1881 and 1882—as city solicitor. Afterward, he became general counsel for the Clover-Leaf Railroad Company, which position he still holds. He was retained by Thomas Tracy in the Terminal condemnation suit, by the defendants indicted by the business it en's grand jury, and has been engaged one way and another in most of the prominent cases that have arisen at our bar.