History of Chicago. From the earliest period to the present time, Part 120

Author: Andreas, Alfred Theodore
Publication date: 1884
Publisher: Chicago, A. T. Andreas
Number of Pages: 1340

USA > Illinois > Cook County > Chicago > History of Chicago. From the earliest period to the present time > Part 120

Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).

"Spring was a phenomenon, a natural born lawyer. His education was quite limited, and he paid little re- spect to the rules of grammar ; yet he could present a point of law to the court, and argue the facts of a case to the jury with a clearness and force seldom equaled. He seemed sometimes to have an intuitive knowledge of the law, and mastery of its profoundest and most subtle principles. His brain worked with the rapidity of lightning, and with the force of an engine. In argu- ment he possessed a keenness of analysis, a force of compact, crushing logic which bore down all opposition. His language though sometimes homely was always forcible and strongly expressive of his thought. He was firm in attack but not often offensive. But his most

* There is often an interval of months, and sometimes of years, between the date of actual license to practice and that of record on the rolls of the Su- preme Court.

astonishing powers were exhibited when some new question arose in the progress of a trial. However sud- denly it might be sprung, and however grave or ab- struse in character, he would instantly and seemingly hy a flash of intuition, grasp it with a skill and mastery of legal learning which seemed possible only to the most skilled preparation. His resources appeared exhaust- less. * * It would be misleading to assume that these rare powers were the mere flashes of genius or intui- tion, for few men studied their cases, or the law involved in them, with more careful assiduity. His memory was marvelous ; his discrimination searching and accurate. His method of studying a case made him complete master of all the law applicable and kindred to it, the reasons upon which it was based, and all the distinctions to be observed. He first consulted the elementary books, and made up his mind what the law ought to be. and then studied the cases in which the principles had been applied. Though he was not an orator, yet before a jury he rarely failed to carry them with him, in a case of anything like even chances. It was, however, in the argument of legal questions before the court, where his comprehensive knowledge of the principles of law, his clear sledge hammer logic, and his wonderful mental endowments shone most conspicuous. * * * He * was devoted to his clients and honorable in his practice. respected and admired by his professional brethren. As a Judge he was scrupulously impartial, upright and able. . In some of his decisions, his genius and legal learning burst out in opinions so luminous and profound as to extort the admiration of the Bar. His faults were of that character which excited commiseration, while they did not destroy admiration for his virtues. He died I believe without an enemy. Colonel Linder, in his 'Reminiscences' says of him, and surviving con- temporaries confirm the testimony-' He was a man of childlike simplicity of manners, as tender-hearted as a woman, and would have stepped aside to keep from treading on a worm.' He was, unfortunately, a victim to the free use of intoxicating liquors, which exercised upon him a peculiarly baleful influence, besides some- times interfering with his official duties .* He regarded himself as inextricably involved in the toils of his evil habit, and bewailed his misfortune, apparently uncon- scious of his power to remove it. He died at the age of forty-four, many years being lost of a life otherwise useful-another instance of the disastrous results of stimulating a brain and nervous system that were much better when left to more natural invigorants."

EDWARD W. CASEY, a native of New Hampshire, was in the order of arrival the fifth inember of the Chi- cago Bar, and was deputy to R. J. Hamilton in 1833. He acted as secretary to him in his capacity of school commissioner at the sale of school lots, October 20 to 25, 1833. Early in the next year his literary, legal and clerical powers were brought into requisition by his townsmen in drafting a petition to the Postmaster- General, asking better mail facilities for the uneasy little town on the Chicago River, which even then was unwilling to be ignored, and eager "to push things. ' Mr. Casey was appointed corporation attorney August IS, and its clerk and collector December 19, 1834. His name appears on the Supreme Court register of lawyers licensed to practice, under date of January 7, 1835. It was while acting as attorney for the town that he prose- cuted Richard Harper for vagrancy. The personal habits of the lawyer furnished occasion to the accused to make the demurrer, whether one vagrant could law-

* ** Court is adjemrard from day to day" says the Chicago Dewwwrat uf February 9, 18;0, " by a spree of Judge Spring."

425

THE BENCH AND BAR.

fully prosecute another. Mr. Casey formed a partner- early as 1839 generally recognized as a lumber merchant. "Though a wellbred lawyer," says Judge Goodrich, "he was never actively engaged in practice, but devoted himself to the accumulation of wealth, and died pos- ship with Buckner S. Morris August 7, 1835, and was elected Justice of the Peace two days latter, but does not appear to have served long in that capacity. That Morris & Casey did a fair share of the law business of the period may be inferred from the frequency with wl.ich their names recur in the scant records of those A. Nulleston early years. Mr. Casey took an active part in the meet- ings and deliberations of November, 1836, which led to the petition for a city charter. The firm was dissolved sessed of a large fortune," September 29, 1880, aged seventy-six. He belonged therefore to the commercial rather than to the professional class of early settlers. on or before December 1, 1836, and Mr. Casey con- tinued to practice here alone until some time in 1838, when his friends induced him to return East. In those JAMES H. COLLINS first became known to the citi- zens of early Chicago in February, 1834, when he formed a partnership with J. D. Caton, who had studied law under him, at Vernon, N. Y., two years before. He pulled up stakes in the fall of 1833, having been de- feated on the Anti-Masonic ticket in his native State, set out for the West, and passing through Chicago in September, settled on "a claim " at Holderman's Grove, early days the excessive use of liquor was almost uni- versal. Here and there a professional man stood aloof from the mad whirl of excitement, but a large propor- tion of the young and brainy fell victims to the spirit of the times in their personal habits. Among them was Mr. Casey, whose life, however, happily teaches an im- portant lesson in this regard. For no sooner had he broken with the associations of the frontier, and with- . in what is now the southwestern corner of Kendall drawn to the purer atmosphere of a New England farm, County, where a settlement had been begun some three years earlier. But the sufferings of the first winter con- vinced him that he was not cut out for a farmer. Indeed than he corrected those mistakes of immature life and became a respectable and self controlled citizen. In the 2 Scam. he is said to have been residing at Con- cord, New Hampshire, in 1841, and in the Times of October 3, 1875, at Newburyport, Mass. "He was," James H. Collins L says Judge Goodrich, "a thorough lawyer, a fine scholar a most amiable man, and a polished gentleman. Though he had acquired a good practice and had before him the highest promise of professional success, he abandoned his profession, returned to his Eastern home, and en- gaged in farming."

JAMES GRANT, born in North Carolina, December 12, 1812, was the sixth member of the Chicago Bar, was admitted to practice by the Supreme Court of Illinois, March 26, 1834, and arrived here "on the 23d of April" of that year. He was appointed State's Attorney, Jan-

James Grant ,

uary 1, 1835. As early as January 30, 1836, he repre- sented large real estate interests here, advertising for sale at that date 7,000 acres at the terminus of the Illi- nois & Michigan Canal, which belonged to Arthur Bronson of New York. About March 30, 1836, he formed a law partnership with Francis Peyton, and the firm, Grant & Peyton, continued until 1838. Mr. Grant removed to Iowa in 1839, where he rose to the position of Judge, and where he still survives, at Davenport, an honor to the Bar and Bench of two great States. Of late years he makes an annual pilgrimage to Chicago, to the reception of old settlers by the Calumet Club ; but the fuller history of his life belongs to the State of his later adoption.

ALEXANDER N. FULLERTON was a native of Ver- mont, and there admitted to the Bar, arrived here be- tween July and November, 1833, but nothing is known of his pursuits until 1833. Early in June of that year he was in partnership with Grant Goodrich : on the 19th he became a member of the first board of health, and three weeks later was appointed clerk of the board of Town Trustees. The firm of Fullerton & Goodrich was dissolved February 22, 1836, and after a year or two of lit'le more than nominal connection with the profession. he finally drifted into commercial business, and was as

he was found at Levi Hill's tavern by Caton, January 3, 1834, with his feet badly frozen ; and it was then ar- ranged that on his recovery he would join Caton in Chicago. A year later, among the expenses of the town of Chicago, is an item of five dollars paid him for legal advice. The firm of Collins & Caton was dis- solved in 1835. Afterward Mr. Collins formed a partnership with Justin Butterfield, the first record of which is found under date of July 16, 1836, and which lasted until about 1845. In those early years of the Chicago Bar, the firm of Butterfield & Collins was the most conspicuous, being usually found engaged in every important lawsuit, on one side or the other. They were of the counsel for the General Government in the cele- brated Beaubien land claim, and Collins bought several of the lots which many of the citizens had intended the old Colonel should bid in without opposition. Mr. Col- lins feeling satisfied that such an arrangement would accrue to the benefit of others rather than of Beaubien, bid on the lots, drawing upon himself much adverse criti- cism from Press and people. He was very obstinate in his opinions and was once committed for contempt by Judge Ford for refusing to submit to the court a docu- ment entrusted to him by a client, John Shrigley, High Constable, which he claimed was privileged. He was associated with Owen Lovejoy in the defense of the latter in 1842, in his celebrated trial for harboring a runaway slave, and did much toward securing his ac- quittal. After dissolving partnership with Butterfiekl he practiced his profession alone for seven or eight years, but in 1853 he formed a new partnership with E. 5. Williams, who had studied law with Butterfield and himself several years before. He was "an early and most violent and extreme abolitionist, and in 1850 was the candidate of that party for Congress, receiving one thousand six hundred and seventy-three votes." He clicd in 1854 of cholera. " He was a good lawyer." says Arnold, "a man of perseverance, pluck and re-o- lution, and as combative as an English bull-dog. *

426

HISTORY OF CHICAGO.

He was indefatigable, dogmatic, never giving up, and if the court decided one point against him, he was ready with another, and if that was overruled, still others." " He seems to me," says Goodrich, " never to have had one particle of genius, but was the hardest worker I ever saw. He bestowed upon the preparation of his cases the most thorough research and critical exam- ination. Though often brought in professional conflict with him I always regarded him as my friend ; and have the melancholy satisfaction of having attended him almost alone during the whole night of his fearful strug- gle with the cholera, until death relieved him of his sufferings." He had at least two daughters-Cornelia M., who was married to J. V. Smith, and who died at her father's house May 31, 1851, at the age of twenty ; and Kate F., who was married May 15, 1855, to John M. Sharp.

HENRY MOORE, a native of Concord, Mass., arrived in Chicago some time in 1834, being admitted to the Bar in Illinois December 8 of that year. He was the second of quite a line of deputies to Colonel Hamilton, Circuit Court clerk, a position he held until the fall of 1835, when his law practice required his attention. Early in 1836, he formed a partnership with F. A. Harding, which was dissolved May 19, 1837; and the firm of Moore & Harding turns up frequently in law business of the time. Mr. Moore was at the Circuit Court of Iroquois County on business May 16, 1836,

Hang Movie

when Judge Ford appointed him for the defense of the murderer " Morris." He " astonished " the prosecuting attorney, James Grant, by "the ability he manifested." "He relied," says Grant, "upon the insufficiency of circumstantial evidence; made the usual argument in such cases, but with much more than the usual ability." In the fall of 1836 Mr. Moore was one of the prominent speakers at the Whig meeting in Chicago; and in De- cember one of the representatives of Cook County at the Internal Improvement Convention held at Vandalia. In March, 1837, his name is on record as a trustee of Rush Medical College, and June 1 of same year he be- came law partner of E. G. Ryan. He obtained about that time from the Legislature the first charter for a gas company in Chicago; and was an active and prominent member of the Bar. He, however, found this moist and breezy climate rather unfavorable for his weak lungs, and on the approach of the winter of 1838-39, he sought alleviation in the genial climate of Havana, Cuba. He did not return to Chicago, but it is learned from " 2 Scam." that he was a resident of Concord, Mass., in 1841, where he died before many years.

BUCKNER STITH MORRIS was born August 19, 1800, at Augusta, Ky., a village founded by his maternal grandfather, Philip Buckner, who had been a Captain in the War of Independence. The parents were Dickin- son Morris, a native of Delaware, but at this time sur- veyor of Bracken County, Ky., and Frances Buckner, by birth a Virginian. Schools were few in Kentucky, and young Morris received his early education at home from his parents. He arrived at man's estate, and had worked some on farms before he conceived the idea of studying for the Bar. From 1824 to 1827 he devoted

to acquiring a knowledge of the profession, and was admitted to the Bar in the latter year. In 1830 he was elected to the Legislature. and was re-elected . in 1832. being a Whig in politics, but never a blind partisan. In 1832 he married Miss Evilina Barker, of Mason County. Ky. At the close of his second term, in 1834, he came to Chicago, by way of the Wabash to Vincennes, and on horseback from that point. Returning for his family. he made a second trip in August, when he per- manently settled here. He found less than forty houses on his arrival, and soon opened a law office. He is found advertised as a Chicago lawyer as early as July 9, 1835 ; and formed a partnership with E. W. Casey August 7, though his name does not appear on the rec- ords of the Supreme Court of Illinois as a licensed law- yer until December 7, 1835. Morris & Casey dis- solved in the fall of 1836, and Morris & Scammon was formed December 5, 1836. This firm was also short-lived, as Mr. Morris was elected Mayor in the spring of 1838, and Alderman of the Sixth Ward in 1839. In IS40 he resumed more fully the practice of his pro- fession, and formed a partnership, August 13, with Will- iam W. Brackett, which lasted about three years. With

Buckner b. Morris .

Lincoln, in 1840, he was nominated presidential elector at large on the Whig ticket. In 1844 he was elected Alderman, but resigned before the close of the year, and was also president of the Hydraulic Company. In 1845 he formed a new firm with William M. Greenwood as partner, who was exchanged as early as March 16, 1846, for John J. Brown. His wife died in 1847, leaving two daughters ; and in 1848 he became a Mason, eventually reaching the highest degree attainable in America. In 1850 he married Miss Eliza A. Stephenson, who died suddenly of heart disease in 1855, leaving one son, who,

٠٠٠

427

THE BENCH AND BAR.

however, lived to be only seven. The firm of Morris well entered on his eightieth year, and was buried from St. Mary's Catholic church. " Both these gentlemen," says the Hon. Thomas Hoyne, speaking of Judges Spring and Morris, "rose to high positions from the native force of their characters, and the possession of vigorous intellects. And what seemed singular in their case is, that in the absence of regular culture in the art of advocacy or oratory, they were among the most suc- cessful speakers of the day. In many respects they ob- tained in jury trials a pre-eminence in advocacy over their more highly favored brethren who had been sed- ulously prepared in universities and schools, both in New York and New England." & Brown continued until the death of Brown in Au- gust, 1850, after which Grant Goodrich became partner for a short time. In 1852 he formed a new partnership, the firm being Morris, Hervey &. Clarkson ; and was the unsuccessful Whig candidate of that year for Sec- retary of State for Illinois. In 1853, Judge Hugh T. Dickey having resigned, Mr. Morris was elected to complete his term as Circuit Judge, and was commis- sioned May 24. The Green trial for wife murder was prosecuted before Judge Morris, and is said to have been the first case in this State in which scientific ex- perts were accepted on the witness stand, Green's con- viction being largely due to the testimony of Drs. Blaney and Bird to the presence of strychnine in the stomach of the deceased. His decisions in relation to that class of evidence have been often quoted, and have been incorporated in the medical jurisprudence of the State. He was tendered a nomination for re-election at the close of his term in 1855, which he declined and. returned to his practice. He soon formed a new part- nership, the firm being Morris & Blackburn in 1856, and Morris, Thomasson & Blackburn in 1857. In 1856 he married Mrs. M. E. Parrish, of Frankfort, Ky., a daughter of Edward Blackburn, and sister of Morris's two partners, Breckenridge F. and James Blackburn, and of the recent Governor of Kentucky, Dr. Luke Blackburn. In 1860 he was a candidate for Governor of Illinois on the Bell and Everett ticket, of which he was an early advocate, as a solution or postponement of the impending crisis. He claimed that a vote for Lin- coln on the one hand or for Breckenridge on the other was a vote for civil war, as sectional feeling had reached a point where no other is- sue could reasonably be anticipated. The election of Bell and Everett alone could save the country, One of his regrets and a constant censure of Andrew Jackson was the breaking up of the United States Bank. He held that the cohesive power of a common financial sys- tem in holding the North and South together had not been duly weighed. His Southern origin and relation- CIRCUIT COURT, 1835-36 .- Thomas Ford, who had been Prosecuting, or State's Attorney, in the Fifth Judicial Circuit, was elected by the General Assembly as Judge of the newly created Sixth Circuit ; but, by exchange, the first term in Chicago in 1835 was held by Judge Sidney Breese. It extended from May 25 to June 9, showing a marked increase in the busi- ness of the court. Before 1835, three or four days were sufficient to clear the meager docket, but thence- forward there never was any lack of business in Chi- cago courts. The judicial requirements of the place have always kept ahead of the legislative provision for its wants. No sooner have apparently ample facilities been secured than the city has leaped forward to double or treble the population contemplated, com- pelling a fresh enlargement of the judicial force. This * 1 do term was the first in Chicago after it became part of the Sixth Circuit, and the first held anywhere by the recently elected Judge Brcese, then in his thirty-fifth year. ship with the Kentucky Blackburns, who were all vio- lent Secessionists, as well as his acknowledged connec- tion with "Sons of Liberty," but above all the heated state of the public mind which could brook nothing less than the most out-spoken Unionism, brought him into suspicion of disloyalty in 1864, in connection with the alleged Camp Douglas conspiracy. Mr. and Mrs. Morris were arrested with the other " conspirators." taken to Cincinnati, tried by court martial and acquitted. Judge Drummond thus testified to his loyalty ; " I have been acquainted with Judge Morris for twenty-five years, and I think his reputation to be, as far as I know it, that of a loyal man. He was a strict advocate of what was the Crittenden compromise, and desired ex- ceedingly that the difficulties between the two sections of the country should be settled amicably. * * not know what developments this trial may have pro- duced, not having followed the evidence, but up to the time of his arrest I certainly should as soon have dis- trusted my own loyalty as that of Judge Morris." Dur- Chief-Justice Marshall died July 6, 1835, and the first formal meeting of the Chicago Bar was held in respect to his memory. The members present were Fullerton, Casey, Goodrich, Morris and Moore of those already mentioned, and Royal Stewart, a later accession. ing his detention, which lasted several months, Mrs. Morris and himself received much kind attention at the hands of one of the female religious orders of the Roman Catholic Church, which eventually led both to give their adhesion to that communion. After their re- The second term of the Circuit Court, in 1835, was held by Judge Stephen T. Logan, also in exchange with Judge Ford. It was opened the first Monday in Octo- ber and closed on the itth. By this time there were lease in the spring of 1865, Judge Morris ceased to be an active member of the Bar, confining himself chiefly to his real estate interests and occasional law business for his friends. He died December 16, 1879, having . one hundred and three civil suits on the docket, and

To this Judge Goodrich adds : "Having been a partner for a short time of Buckner S. Morris, I am jus- tified in saying-and I think all who were acquainted with his professional capacity will agree with me-that he was no ordinary man. It is evident his general ed- ucation, his professional reading and training had not been systematic or thorough, but he possessed good vigor of mind and strong common sense and sincerity of manner, which joined with a popular homeliness of expression, apt and striking comparisons, fervent zeal and apparent honesty of belief in the justice of his cause, made him a formidable opponent before a jury. In a desperate case he was remarkable, and the more desperate it was, the more conspicuous his powers be- came. He often carried his case by main strength against the law and the facts ; and it became a common remark that in a bad case he had no equal. He was elected Judge of the circuit, but was better fitted for practice and served but a brief term on the Bench. In character he was simple as a child, tenderly sympathetic and kind, heartily good-natured, and genial in his man- ners. I doubt if the remembrance of any deceased member of the Chicago Bar is cherished with more un- mixed sentiments of kindness than that of Judge Mor- ris." "For native strength, I never saw his superior," says Mr. Beach; "his natural powers of oratory were truly great."

428

HISTORY OF CHICAGO.

seventy of these were determined at that term. Of the thirty-seven people's cases twenty-five were closed- nineteen were merely for non-attendance as jurors, of whom two were fined five dollars each ; and twelve cases were continued. The case of most interest at this term was the-

SECOND MURDER TRIAL .- The criminal under in- dictment gave the name of Joseph F. Morris, but it was afterwards stated that his real name was Joseph Thomasson. His victim's name was Felix Legre, and the murder was committed about twenty miles from Chicago on the road to Ottawa. The Grand Jury of Cook County found a true bill against Morris at the fall term of 1835, but by change of venne the case was carried to Iroquois County, where it was tried the en- suing term. Notwithstanding the most strenuous efforts, and an able defense on general principles, by Henry Moore, who had been assigned to him as coun- sel by Judge Ford, Morris was convicted on rather slender evidence, wholly circumstantial. He was the person last seen in company with the murdered man, and a knife was found in his possession which the re- cent employer of Legre fully identified as belonging to that unfortunate individual. He denied the killing, but acknowledged that he knew the guilty party, whose name, however, he steadily refused to divulge-a self- deceiving evasion founded probably on the false name under which he was indicted. The implied chivalry and devotion to alleged principles was too fine-spun for a jury of pioneer settlers of Iroquois County, and they found him guilty of murder, though not without some hesitation. On May 19, Judge Ford sentenced him to be hanged June 10, 1836 ; and the sentence was faithfully carried into effect, though in the absence of a jail it required persistent watchfulness on the part of Sheriff Dunn of Iroquois County and his deputy, George Courtright. The substantial justice of the ver- dict has never been seriously questioned, but conviction on the evidence would be to-day improbable, if not hopeless.

Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.

History of Chicago. From the earliest period to the present time, Part 120

Author: Andreas, Alfred Theodore Publication date: 1884 Publisher: Chicago, A. T. Andreas Number of Pages: 1340

Author: Andreas, Alfred Theodore
Publication date: 1884
Publisher: Chicago, A. T. Andreas
Number of Pages: 1340