History of Oakland County, Michigan, with illustrations descriptive of its scenery, palatial residences, public buildings, fine blocks, and important manufactories, Part 15

Author: Durant, Samuel W
Publication date: 1877
Publisher: Philadelphia, L. H. Everts & co.
Number of Pages: 553

USA > Michigan > Oakland County > History of Oakland County, Michigan, with illustrations descriptive of its scenery, palatial residences, public buildings, fine blocks, and important manufactories > Part 15

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).

The judges who have held the circuit courts in Oakland County throughout its varied history of jurisdiction and nomenclature are as follows: Hon. John Hunt, 1826; Hon. James Witherell, 1827; Hon. Henry Chipman, 1828; Wil- liam Woodbridge, Solomon Sibley, Henry Chipman, and Ross Wilkins from 1828 to 1833, when the circuit court of the Territory was created. From June, 1833, to 1837, Judge Wm. A. Fletcher, an associate justice of the supreme court, as chief justice, and Daniel Le Roy and Amasa Bagley as associates, held the court. The judges of the first circuit court, from 1826 to June, 1833, were all members of the supreme bench of the Territory. In 1837 and thence to 1839 the courts were held by Hon. George Morell, one of the associates of the supreme court, and Samuel Satterlee and David Paddock, associate judges of Oakland County. From 1839 to 1848, Charles W. Whipple, an associate of the supreme bench, was the presiding judge of the circuit court of Oakland, Daniel Paddock, G. O. Whittemore, Jeremiah Clark, and Ziba Swan being the associates. In 1848, Judge Whipple was made chief justice of the supreme court. From 1848 to 1852. Hon. Sanford M. Green was the circuit judge. In 1851, Hon. Joseph T. Copeland was elected judge of the circuit, being the first one so chosen in the circuit, and presided over the court until 1857, when he gave place to Hon. S. M. Greene, who again assumed the ermine, and wore it until 1867. He was suc- ceeded by Hon. James S. Dewey, who held the position until 1873, and was suc-

ceeded by Hon. Levi B. Taft from September, 1873, to December, 1875; Hon. Augustus C. Baldwin, the present incumbent, presiding at the January term, 1876.

THE PROSECUTING ATTORNEYS

who have conducted the people's prosecutions against evil-doers in Oakland County are as follows : Daniel Le Roy, 1820-26; G. O. Whittemore, W. F. Mosely, Thomas J. Drake, 1827-30 ; . Origen D. Richardson, 1830-36 ; John T. Raynor, George Wisner, James B. Hunt, James McCabe, A. H. Hanscom, H. L. Stevens, 1837-1853 ; A. C. Baldwin, 1853-54 ; Charles Draper, 1855-60 and 1873-74; Junius Ten Eyck, 1861-62; Michael E. Crofoot, 1863-66 and 1869-70; Oscar F. Wisner, 1867-68; Henry M. Look, 1871-72; James K. Patterson, 1875, and present incumbent. These officers were appointed by the governor up to 1851, when they were and have been since elected by the people.

INJUNCTION MASTERS.

Sanford M. Green, 1847; Alfred Treadway, 1848 to 1851, inclusive.

CIRCUIT COURT COMMISSIONERS

were provided for in the constitution of 1850 to take the place and possess the powers of the masters of chancery prohibited by that instrument, and the first one was elected in 1851. Previous to this time masters in chancery had been appointed by the governor, and among those who filled the office at different times previous to 1851 were Morgan L. Drake, 1847, and Calvin C. Parks, 1848. The first cir- cuit court commissioner elected was William W. Phelps, who held the office two years,-a single term, 1852-53. He was succeeded by Junius Ten Eyck, 1854-57 ; Edward P. Harris, 1858-61 ; James A. Jacokes and Joseph R. Bowman, 1862-65 ; Mark S. Brewer and Byron L. Ransford, 1866-69 ; James K. Patterson and James A. Jacokes, 1870-71; Joseph E. Sawyer and Thomas Curtis, 1872-73; James A. Jacokes and Edward J. Bissell, 1874-75; Edward J. Bissell and George W. Smith, 1876-77, present incumbents.

THE COURT OF CHANCERY

provided for by the constitution of 1836 was created in 1837, and the sessions of the court held at Detroit up to 1840. The powers of this court were co-extensive with those of the chancery courts of England, unless otherwise specially pro- hibited in the constitution or by legislation. The presiding judge was called a chancellor, and was appointed by the governor for the whole State, and registers were appointed for each circuit. The first circuit included Oakland County, but in 1840 two new circuits were formed, the fourth circuit comprising the counties of Oakland, Genesee, Lapeer, Saginaw, Shiawassee, and Clinton, the headquarters of the circuit being at Pontiac. In 1839 the chancellor's court was given cogni- . zance of the banks, and in 1841 the power was extended to partition and sale of lands concurrent with the circuit court. The supreme court possessed appellate powers over this court. The first term of the court of chancery was held in Pon- tiac in September, 1840, Hon. Elon Farnsworth, chancellor, being present, and Frederic A. Williams, register. The first case on the docket of this court was that of W. H. H. Sheldon, complainant, vs. Henry Bishop, Jane Bishop, Charles Postal, and James Minot. The first two defendants were residents of Michigan, and the other were non-residents, and the complainant was ordered to publish notice of the pendency of the suit in the State paper at Detroit. On the 20th of May, 1840, the chancellor ordered a private seal to be used until a public one was obtained for the circuit. J. R. Bowman was appointed assistant register, and Alfred Treadway taxing-master. The first decree of foreclosure entered in this court was on May 5, 1841, in the case of Joseph B. Varnum, Dudley B. Fuller, John A. Graham, complainants, vs. Olmstead Chamberlain, Mary C. Chamber- lain, and Moses Wanzer, defendants. The amount of the decree was two thou- sand four hundred and eleven dollars and seventy-seven cents, and the premises ordered sold was lot 66, of Pontiac.

In the spring of 1842 the official head of the court changed, Randolph Man- ning coming into the office, which position he held until 1846, when Hon. Elon Farnsworth came again into power, and so continued until the court was abolished in 1847. Alfred Treadway was appointed register of the circuit in 1842, and held the position during the remainder of the existence of the court. The busi- ness of the court was transacted and closed up by the associate justices of the supreme court, who held chancery terms of the circuit court. The injunction masters succeeded the associate judges of the circuit court in 1847, and were suc- ceeded in turn by circuit court commissioners in 1852.

THE DISTRICT COURT

of the counties of Wayne, Oakland, Washtenaw, and Jackson was created March 9, 1843, and vested with full power over all crimes, misdemeanors, and offenses com- mitted against the laws of the State. The presiding judge was appointed by the

HISTORY OF OAKLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN.

governor for a term of five years, and the associate judges of the circuit court were to hold the same position in this court. Two terms per year were held in all of the counties of the district except Wayne, where four terms per year were held. The county clerks were the clerks of the court, and the presiding judge received a salary of one thousand dollars per annum, paid out of the State treasury, and the associates one dollar and fifty cents per day while court was in session, paid by the county treasurer. The presiding judge alone, or with an associate, could hold the terms of the court. The first term of the court held in Pontiac convened April 18, 1843, with Hon. B. F. H. Witherell the presiding judge, and David Paddock and G. O. Whittemore associates, Joseph R. Bowman clerk, Jonathan Chase foreman of the grand jury. The bulk of the criminal causes on the circuit court docket were transferred to the docket of this court, and nineteen were dis- posed of by entering a nolle prosequi; two indictments were quashed, three were tried and defendants acquitted ; ten defendants were fined six cents and costs, and one five dollars and costs. One indictment was found against Horatio A. Howard for maintaining a nuisance, his dam obstructing the free course of the water of Clinton river, and he was tried and convicted, and the sheriff ordered to break the dam. Several defaulting jurors were attached for contempt, but purged them- selves therefrom, and were allowed to depart the court without costs.

The last term of the court was held in November, 1846, Judge Witherell pre- siding throughout the entire existence of the tribunal.

THE PROBATE COURT.

The ordinance of 1787 provided rules of inheritance which should govern the Northwest Territory until such time as its own governors and assemblies should prove other laws regulating the line of descent and proof of wills. The widow's dower was preserved, and wills were to be attested by three witnesses, and, when duly proven, were to be recorded within one year after offices for such purposes were provided. On August 31, 1805, the governor-Hull-and Judges Wood- ward and Bates passed an act providing for the probate of wills and the adminis- tration of estates. Wills were to be recorded by the clerk of the district court in his office.

Previous to this time the assembly of the Northwest Territory had provided for the same duties and their discharge; and previous to 1796 wills had been executed and proven and intestacies administered upon by virtue of the English and French rules and requirements in force in the Territory. In January, 1809, the law of wills and intestacies was amended, and more safeguards thrown around estates of deceased persons, but this law was repealed in September, 1810. On January 19, 1811, the probate law was re-enacted and amended, and a register of probate provided for, with the authority of a judge in the probate of wills and granting administration on intestate estates, and wills were recorded in his office ; there being a register in each of the judicial districts into which the Territory was then divided. Power to compel specific performance on contracts of decedents for conveyance of land was vested in the register, and also the power to decree the sale of lands to pay the debts of decedents. On the 27th of July, 1818, the gov- ernor and judges passed an act creating a probate court in each organized county, which were held by a judge appointed by the governor. A register of wills was also appointed by the same authority, who was also register of deeds until 1835. The probate court had full cognizance of mortuary matters, and the supreme court had appellate jurisdiction over the same. The probate law was amended from time to time by the Territorial authority, and has been since the State was first admitted into the Union, until now the administration of estates is simplified and made almost absolutely free from court costs, the judge being paid a salary and keeping his own records. Litigants, however, like other luxurious livers, pay for their own pleasures. In 1837 the power to sell real estate for the payment of debts was given the probate court concurrently with the circuit and chancellor's courts.

The first session of the probate court in and for Oakland County was held at the house of Colonel David Stanard, in the township of Bloomfield, in said county, on the 15th day of June, 1822, Judge William Thompson presiding. On the application of Major Joseph Todd, Mrs. Elizabeth Harding was cited to appear on the 27th instant next ensuing, before the court, and file her petition for administration on the estate of Eliphalet Harding, deceased, and the court adjourned to that time and the same place. On the 29th of June, Mrs. Hard- ing appeared, and, together with John Todd, was appointed administratrix of the estate of her late husband. Messrs. David Stanard, Calvin Gibbs, and Charles Howard were appointed appraisers. Before the inventory and appraisement were returned the widow married, and Judge Thompson considered her wedding equivalent to her funeral, evidently, for he designated ever afterwards Mr. Todd as the surviving administrator. The Harding estate proving insolvent, the late widow received one hundred and sixty-two dollars and eighty-four cents only of the goods and chattels of the estate.

The first inventory filed in the court was that of the estate of J. S. Davis, deceased, September 7, 1822, the same footing up four hundred and ninety-eight dollars and fifty cents on personal property and three hundred and ninety dollars on real estate. The widow received three hundred dollars of the personal prop- erty, and the balance was sold by the appraisers. Sidney Dole and David Perrin were commissioners to audit the claims against the estate. The third session of the court was held at the house of Olmstead Chamberlain, in the village of Pon- tiac, the next session at Colonel Stanard's, and the fifth one at Major Joseph Todd's, in Bloomfield. All of these sessions had been special ones, held as emer- gency called for the exercise of the authority of the court. But at the fifth session regular sessions were ordered to be held on the first Saturday of each month, in Pontiac, at the office of Daniel Le Roy, Esq. The first order of dis- tribution of an estate was entered April 5, 1823, in the estate of John Prindle, deceased, upon which administration was granted December 16, 1822. The first letters of guardianship were granted August 22, 1823, to Nathaniel Millard, guardian of Maria, Aaron W., and George B. Webster, children of Aaron Web- ster, deceased. On December 15, 1823, regular sessions were ordered to be held at Bloomfield, at the office of the register, on the first Saturday of each month. The first lunatic examined and restrained was Imri Fish. Elijah S. Fish was appointed guardian of his estate May 7, 1825. The first will probated in the court was that of Alpheus Williams, deceased, which was proven September 6, 1826, and executed on the 19th of April preceding. The will of John Powers, deceased, was proven the same day, and was executed July 21, 1828. In the estate of James Harrington, deceased, upon which administration was granted in 1826, there was a will, but it was never proven before the court, although among the files of the court. This will was dated April 20, 1822, and duly executed, Amos Gould of Cayuga county, New York, being named therein as executor. He was held by the court to be incapable of discharging the trusts of the will, and Mrs. Harrington declining to serve as administratrix, William Thompson, former judge of the court, was appointed administrator.

The will of Arthur Powers, of Farmington, probated in 1835, covers a super- ficial area of twelve feet by twenty inches, and consists of twelve sheets, twenty- four pages of ordinary foolscap.

The items of the bills allowed by the probate court against the pioneers' estates read strangely in the presence of the sentiment of to-day. One among many similar ones was allowed against the first estate brought into the court, which reads thus :

" April 19, 1819. To 1 whisky-barrel, lent $1.00

Nov. 3. To 5 gallons of whisky, at 5 shillings 3.13

April 17, 1822. To interest on the whisky .. 43

$4.56"

Another one was for refreshments furnished at the sale of the personal effects of a deceased person, and included one bottle of brandy, two bottles of whisky, etc.

The judges of probate from the organization of the county up to 1836, all of whom were appointed by the governor, were as follows: Dr. William Thompson, 1821-24; Nathaniel Millard, 1825-26 ; Smith Weeks, 1827; G. O. Whittemore, 1827-28; W. F. Mosely, 1828; Ogden Clarke, August, 1828, to August, 1832 ; Stephen Reeves, August, 1832, to 1837; and he was then elected for a term of four years, and re-elected for another term of same duration, ending December 31, 1844. He was succeeded as follows : M. La Mont Bagg, 1845-48 ; M. E. Crofoot, 1849-56 ; Oscar F. North, 1857-61 ; Harry C. Andrews, April, 1861-64 ; Francis Darrow, 1865-68; Alfred Crawford, 1869-72 ; J. C. Powell, 1873-76 ; James C. Jacokes, 1877, present incumbent.

CAUSES CÉLÉBRES.

Among the causes of note tried in the Oakland courts were the trials, for alleged murder, of Dr. Russell and the Tully boys.

The first one is commonly known as

THE BISMUTH MURDER, OF PONTIAC,

and was tried in 1846. The facts of the case were briefly as follows : Dr. James G. Russell, a young man, came to Pontiac from Monroe county, New York, in the spring of 1845, and entered the office of Dr. Isaac Paddock as a medical student of two or three years' reading. He practiced some, was well received, and was generally spoken of as a young man of something more than ordinary promise in the profession. He attended the Methodist Episcopal church, and was a prominent member of the choir. Some time during the summer his wife came to Pontiac, from Greece, Monroe county, New York, a daughter of a wealthy and long-es- tablished merchant of that place, of the name of Graham. November 1, 1845,

HISTORY OF OAKLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN.

Russell went to Cleveland, Ohio, to attend his first course of medical lectures, and returned about the 1st of March following. During his absence his wife and child, the latter about a year old, remained with Dr. Paddock's family. On his return Russell resumed his reading and practice with Dr. Paddock, and leased a house and began housekeeping. About the middle of May his wife was taken violently ill with purging and vomiting, which lasted a few days, and from which attack she died. Her difficulty was supposed at the time to have been inflamma- tion of the stomach, but after a few days it began to be rumored that she was probably poisoned, which led to the disinterment of the body, and a post-mortem examination and inquest. The stomach and liver and a portion of the intestines were removed, and sent to Ann Arbor for a chemical examination and analysis. Russell went to Cleveland immediately after his wife's death, but, on learning of the rumors concerning the cause of her decease, returned to Pontiac, and was arrested on the charge of murder and committed to jail, where he remained until his trial in November, 1846, but always asserted his innocence concerning the alleged crime. During the trial, Dr. Douglass, of the university, who made the chemical analysis, exhibited some arsenic which was obtained from the stomach and other portions of the viscera sent him. Dr. Paddock testified that he adminis- tered to Mrs. Russell subnitrate of bismuth frequently during her sickness, and it was proven by the defense that in nature bismuth is found in combination with arsenic, and that traces of arsenic are sometimes found in specimens of bis- muth which were supposed to have been chemically pure. A sample of bismuth obtained from the same source from whence Dr. Paddock procured his supply was analyzed by a chemist from Detroit, and was found to contain arsenic. These points were made the ground of defense mainly, and Judge Crofoot elaborated the theory very ingeniously and with consummate skill, and the result of the trial was the acquittal of the accused by the jury. Many of the citizens of Pontiac, however, were not convinced by the developments of the trial and the arguments of the defense, and felt so scandalized by the verdict of the jury that they attempted summary vengeance on Russell, and he was followed from house to house during the night following his discharge, but the darkness favoring him, he made good his escape. The people then gave vent to their feelings by hang- ing the effigy of the doctor on a gallows erected in front of the court-house, intended for the doctor himself. Some months after the end of the trial a letter of inquiry was received by the county clerk, Joseph R. Bowman, asking informa- tion in regard to the trial, and a transcript of the record was sent in reply thereto, and a few months later the news came of the shooting of Russell, in Texas, by the brother of a young woman whom the rascal, under promise of marriage, had seduced, in Georgia or Alabama. The case was most ably conducted for the people by George W. Wisner and General H. L. Stevens, and as ably defended by Howard, Thomas J. Drake, and Michael E. Crofoot, then a young practitioner, but whose admirable management of the defense gave promise of that success of which his later years have given full fruition.

THE TULLY MURDER CASE

was a no less celebrated trial than the bismuth murder. Hon. Charles Draper conducted the case for the people, and Thomas J. Drake, Moses Wisner, and Judge Crofoot managed the defense. The facts of the case, as charged in the indictment, were these: On the fifth day of December, 1857, John, Robert, and Charles Tully, sons of Patrick Tully, willfully murdered their father, the motive therefor being supposed and alleged to be to get possession of six hundred dollars in money the old gentleman had laid away in the house. The trial was had at the March term of the circuit court, 1858, and continued nine days, and resulted in the conviction of Robert and John and the acquittal of Charles Tully. The conviction of Robert and John was followed by their sentence to the penitentiary for life, and their immediate incarceration in the prison at Jackson. The excite- ment was most intense, the seemingly undoubted guilt of the victims, sons of the deceased, adding to the otherwise horrible atrocity. But the lawyers for the de- fense, impressed with the innocence of their clients, which the prisoners stoutly and persistently maintained, set about the procuring of a new trial and the reversal of the first verdict of guilt. A supersedeas was granted by the supreme court, and a new trial ordered, on the ground that the jury in rendering their verdict did not define the degree of the crime, when they ought to have done so, specify- ing in their verdict that the prisoners were guilty of murder in the first or second degree, as the case might be. The verdict was simply, "Guilty in manner and form as charged in the indictment," and, although the indictment charged the prisoners with willful and deliberate murder, yet technically the law was not fol- lowed, and the new trial came off in March, 1860, resulting in the discharge of both Robert and John. Charles Tully, having been acquitted on the first trial, was admitted to the witness stand on the second trial, and his evidence was mainly the cause of the acquittal of his brothers. Affidavits of fellow-prisoners of Robert and John also were produced, inculpating other unknown parties, and ex-

onerating the sons from the horrible crime of killing their own father for his money, and, the excitement having died away, the verdict was received as a matter of course.

The docket of G. O. Whittemore, Esq., justice of the peace, has the following for its first entry :

" Burleigh Hunt US. July 15, 1826. Judg't confessed by defendant on

" Orson Bartlett

note for the use of Wm. F. Mosely-

" Damages 6.49

" Entering action, 1s .; Judg't, 1s .; Satisfaction, 6c. .31

$6.80

" Execution to issue after ninety days.

" Ex'on .25

" Execution issued October 17, 1826 (Hodges, const.).

" Ex'on returned satisfied December 27, 1826.

" Rec'd damages and costs. G. O. WHITTEMORE, Jus. Peace.

" Rec'd the amount of damages in full of plff. "W. F. MOSELY, Att'y for B. Hunt, by H. Cole, Esqr."

The first summons was issued by Justice Whittemore, July 29, 1826, in the case of Aaron Smith vs. John Hearsay. Judgment was rendered for ten dollars, by default, August 7, at two o'clock P.M., and October 26 the amount of judg- ment and costs was paid to the court. August 1, the court, at the instance of Wm. Thompson, issued an attachment against the goods and chattels of Wm. Johnson, and one bond, appraised at thirty-one dollars and five cents, and one ox, appraised at twenty-five dollars, were taken thereon by Constable Schuyler Hodges, from which twenty-one dollars and thirty-four cents were subsequently made.

Dr. Thompson got after John Squiers, who was about to abscond, and the law, supplemented by a capias ad respondendum, held him fast, and he entered his plea of nil debit before his honor, on the 23d of August ; and by the request of the defendant, the court was held open until the next morning at eight o'clock, when the parties appeared, and George Lee was sworn for the defense, but as the record reads, " says nothing,-nothing material." Judgment for plaintiff; damages, nine dollars and twenty-four cents; costs, one dollar and forty-three and a half cents. Execution issued August 28 at ten o'clock A.M., and returned same day, and the defendant committed, with three dollars and six cents additional costs to pay.

The first criminal proceeding before Justice Whittemore was had January 13, 1827, when Josiah S. Caldwin complained of an assault and battery received at the hands of Elijah Willets. Willets was brought before the majesty of the law on the 15th, and, on the testimony of Baldwin and Calvin Ball, held to answer to the county court, under fifty dollars bonds, whereupon the punisher and pun- ishee came together and settled their differences, and the court discharged the recognizance on payment of costs by the defendant.

On the 26th of February, 1827, the learned professions of the law and medicine were brought to the bar for the adjudication of the bench. Daniel Le Roy, a lawyer, sued Cyrus A. Chipman, a doctor, and the lawyer and the judge were one too many for the doctor, and the latter confessed judgment to the amount of eight dollars and thirty-four cents; and another doctor, Thaddeus Thompson, became surety for his brother physician, and a stay of execution was ordered for ninety days, at the end of which period, it is safe to say, the lawyer and judge were physicked out of the damages and costs by the doctor's pills and lotions, which were more potent and less uncertain than the law's delays to bring men to terms of settlement.

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 Oakland County, Michigan, with illustrations descriptive of its scenery, palatial residences, public buildings, fine blocks, and important manufactories, Part 15

Author: Durant, Samuel W Publication date: 1877 Publisher: Philadelphia, L. H. Everts & co. Number of Pages: 553

Author: Durant, Samuel W
Publication date: 1877
Publisher: Philadelphia, L. H. Everts & co.
Number of Pages: 553