USA > Missouri > The history of the bench and bar of Missouri : With reminiscences of the prominent lawyers of the past, and a record of the law's leaders of the present > Part 13
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).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94
92
THE HISTORY OF THE BENCH AND BAR OF MISSOURI.
editor of the " Missouri Republican " at that time was Mr. Chambers, a man of very decided ability, independent and fearless in the advocacy of any opinions that he entertained. Through the editorial columns of that paper he advocated and urged that a pardon be granted. Austin A. King was Governor, and under the then Constitution of Missouri, the Executive had the power to grant pardon in all cases, excepting impeachment, before or after conviction. Our Constitution was the same then in that particular as is the Constitu- of the United States and some other States of the Union. King finally decided to grant such pardon, the young noblemen were taken back to their friends in France, and Gonsalve afterwards died in an insane asylum.
Another important case following this was the prosecution of Nathaniel Chiles, first teller of the old State bank. The president of this bank was Joseph Charless, who was afterwards killed by Thornton, an ex-teller in the establishment, the trial of whom will be noted hereafter. Chiles stood well in the community, and, in fact, there was about an equal division of opinion as to his guilt or innocence, as the incriminating facts were rather circumstantial. The contest was a great one. The trial occupied nearly a month, and the defense was brilliantly conducted. Lackland, Geyer, Bates, Blennerhasset and Wright were among those who made speeches to the jury, and they were all marked by an excel- lence that attracted wide attention. The citizens of to-day cannot realize the interest aroused at times in these criminal trials, where great legal contests occurred. Compara- tively speaking, all the city became interested in them, and the court room would be crowded to overflowing by the best people of the city. Ladies, too, attended. During this trial I was clerking in a very subordinate position in the store of Messrs. Elliott & Couchois on Market street, right opposite the court room where the trial of the Montesquieu brothers took place. My principal duty was to carry bundles to the homes of retail purchasers. This gave me a fine opportunity, after hurriedly delivering the articles entrusted to my care, to stop at the court room and listen to the proceedings. For a time I carried out my desires in this direction without any unnecessary absence being noticed. But the fascina- tion of the proceedings, and especially the arguments in the Chiles case, caused mne to throw discretion to the winds, and I soon found myself sent home with a polite note to my father, telling him that in the opinion of my employers, I was not well adapted to the dry goods business. The impressions made upon me at that time as to the peculiar mental characteristics of each of those engaged in this trial was very marked, and were afterwards carefully analyzed, considered and studied as they were seen in other great legal contests.
Judge Lackland was peculiarly deficient in the graces of oratory, but he had a logical mind and a knowledge of human nature that few inen possessed. He was crude in expres- sion, often using language that was harsh and repulsive, but the evil of his action in this respect was neutralized by his air of earnestness and sincerity, which impressed all with his honesty of purpose. It was the reputation lic acquired as Circuit Attorney that raised him to the Criminal Bench, and, after serving one term in that court, he was elected to the Circuit Court. He was universally conceded to be a inan of the highest honor and strict- est integrity. As a Judge, he was peculiarly circumspect, and when off the bench forbade any lawyer or suitor interested in a case to speak of its merits or demerits in his presence. The strong determination of Lackland is illustrated by his conduct in a case tried in the St. Louis Criminal Court in the year 1857, as quoted in the address to the jury of Uriel Wright, in the case of State vs. Worell. He says: "At the present term of the Criminal Court, before Judge Lackland, a man was tried for murder and convicted. He was
93
RECOLLECTIONS OF THE CRIMINAL PRACTICE.
defended by counsel of highly respectable position in their profession. The jury box con- tained as much intelligence and discrimination as our panels there ordinarily furnish. The counsel was employed by the prisoner, not assigned by the court. The trial lasted several days. The defense of insanity was not relied on-no preparation of the case was made with a view to any such issue-no evidence brought to sustain it. The counsel saw no indication of mental disorder in their client - nothing to create a suspicion of insanity. In the trial there was no allusion to insanity. The verdict was guilty. A motion for a new trial was filed by his counsel, and overruled on all the grounds set out in the motion; but the Judge, on his own motion, set aside the verdict, because the defendant was insane when he committed the homicide! The Court ordered a commission of six physicians to go to the jail, and after examination of the prisoner, to report in writing his condition as to sanity. They did so, and pronounced him sane. The Judge told them they were mis- taken, and ordered a re-examination. The result of repeated examinations was the joint report of all the physicians that the prisoner was certainly insane-insane at the time of the killing."
It was my pleasure to hear all of the able lawyers mentioned above in some of the greatest cases, and later to be occasionally arrayed in opposition to most of them. With due respect to all, I am convinced that Uriel Wright was the most accomplished jury law- yer of them all. As an advocate, lie was unrivaled. I do not think there was his superior in the country. He was medium in height and rather stout. Straight and dignified in bearing, he had not the least appearance of pomposity. His features were symmetrical, though rather full; forehead high, eyes small and gray, but bright and variable; a well- formed mouth, with lips somewhat thin; and prominent chin, that gave him, especially when speaking, an appearance of determination. Withal, his face was mobile and remark- ably expressive. He was designated as "Major Wright," though I do not know from whence came the title. He was courteous, affable and very popular in social life. He was extensively read in history, poetry, romance and philosophy, and was a classical scholar. Add to all this, an almost faultless delivery, with a. voice soft, musical, flexible and strong, ranging from the lowest whisper to the highest chords of distinct and harmonious articulation-and you can form some idea of the powers of Major Wright as an advocate. It was surely a treat to hear him in a great effort before a jury. I heard him in the case of the State vs. Robert McO'Blenis, a most exciting trial, and a case of such a desperate character as to bring into play alinost all of his varied powers as a lawyer and advocate. This case was remarkable in more ways than one. It marked an era in the social conditions of our city. Further, it affords an illustration of the diverse gifts and characteristics of three among the most prominent attorneys mentioned hereto- fore in this article.
Social conditions were somewhat different in St. Louis in the year 1855 from what they are now. The railroad system was in embryo. The Mississippi, Missouri and Illi- nois Rivers were, in truth, the great highways of traffic. The levee was a vast ware- house of the moving mercantile products of the world. The long line of vessels of vary- ing size and beauty, stationary or moving in all directions on the river; the teeming multitude of picturesque employes, loading and unloading freight; the quaint and melodious songs of the incoming and outgoing boats; the noisy talk of superintending officials; the clanging bells; the puffing and whistling of engines; the continuous stream of rattling drays and other wagons, so often clogged, with their cursing drivers and crack-
94
THE HISTORY OF THE BENCH AND BAR OF MISSOURI.
ing whips; the hurried and dodging travelers, men, women and children; the noise, bustle and endless confusion-all made it like unto one of the important shipping points of the old world. The boating interests were in the ascendant in those days. The railroad developed and their glory departed.
The representatives of river navigation were a class unto themselves, and wielded a power in more ways than one. They were men of hardy mold, frank, courageous, gen- erous and somewhat reckless. They were strong in their likes and dislikes, quick to resent insult, good friends, dangerous enemies and almost universally good fighters. These char- acteristics impressed and affected social conditions. Fighting on reasonable, and frequently on slight, provocation was still respectable, if not fashionable. The tale-bearer or individual who reported the foibles or vices of men fared badly in those days. Scandals were rarely printed, except in papers of unknown proprietorship. To be the known author of such usually meant great bodily injury or death.
The fighting habit was confined to no particular class or occupation, and was nurtured by other impelling causes. The influx of sporting inen from the South was large. Gam- bling of every kind flourished almost openly. Slavery existed. The native American spirit was prominent, and the prejudice against foreigners was strong. A favorite amusement of the native "tough " was to go south of Market street with his "crowd " and "clean out " one or more "Dutch " beer saloons. And the prejudice against the Irish had, a year or two before, developed the disgraceful riots that killed many people of that race and destroyed churches and other property. The then famous Ned Buntline was a prominent actor in these bloody scenes. Such conditions developed the worst kind of ruffianisin. It produced inen who had no respect for the law or its officers, who recklessly trampled upon the rights of otliers, and whose principal recreation was to create tumult and disorder, frequently accompanied withi bodily injury and death to innocent citizens. A number of these men, though a source of terror and apprehension to the community, were accorded immunity for their acts by reason of influential friends. But there had gradually grown up a strong feel- ing of resentinent against those who indulged in courses which brought discredit and dis- grace upon the rapidly growing "City of the West." It was smothered, but it was there, and an act of peculiar wantonness brought it into play.
On February 28, 1855, between the hours of 12 and 1 o'clock p. m., there was a siliall crowd drinking in the saloon of Jolin King, adjoining the Fourth Street entrance to the old Planters' House. At that time this saloon was the favorite resort of its kind in the city, and had an extensive patronage. In front of the counter, with others, were Benjamin F. Brand and Robert McO'Blenis, usually called "Bob O'Blenis." Brand was a duty miar- shal, and in the discharge of his duties as such, had incurred the enmity of O'Blenis. It was usually the custom in those days for officials to visit bar rooms and indulge in drinking. Brand belonged to a Kentucky family and stood well in the city. He was a large, well- proportioned, fine-looking man and when not in his cups, genial and polite. He was known to be brave and fearless in the discharge of his duty, and not averse, if insulted, to fighting. O'Blenis was known as one of the most reckless figliters in the city, and his reputation in that line went beyond the borders of the State. He was a large and powerfully built man, almost a giant in stature and strengtlı. He had been involved in many difficulties, had passed through inany dangers, and escaped without very serious troubles. In the livery stable and sporting business, lie liad accumulated what was at that time considered quite a
95
RECOLLECTIONS OF THE CRIMINAL PRACTICE.
fortune. Belonging to a type as referred to above, he had many followers, copyists and friends.
Brand was considerably intoxicated, and inclined to be quarrelsome. He accused O'Blenis of calling him, on a former occasion, a foul name. Then followed hot words and bitter curses. O'Blenis suddenly withdrew, and those present thought the affair ended. Brand continued to talk and abuse O'Blenis, some of his language being of a very threat- ening character. On the northeast corner of the alley on Chestnut Street, between Third and Fourth Streets, was the saloon of Louis Nievergelder. This place was a convenient resort, and he a popular host. The old Post Office, on the opposite corner of the alley, had not been long removed, and right opposite was the Central Engine House, where the O'Blenis trial was afterwards conducted. O'Blenis did business not far from Nievergel- der's saloon. After leaving Brand he went directly to Nievergelder's and asked for and obtained from him his revolver. He was in the habit of leaving it at that saloon. Some talk passed between him and Nievergelder, by inference, of an incriminating nature, and Nievergelder gave him his revolver. It was a deadly weapon of the worst kind, a self- cocking revolver. Within thirty minutes after leaving Brand in King's saloon, O'Blenis returned, and walked to within a few feet of Brand, who was leaning on the counter. In a determined voice he said to Brand, "I suppose you have something against me; now is the time to settle it," and immediately drew his pistol and shot in rapid succes- sion four times. Each shot took effect, the last one and the fatal one piercing the lungs. It was claimed by O'Blenis and his friends that Brand had drawn his pistol, but it was never reliably proven. The few present fled in dismay.
After the shooting O'Blenis walked to the end of the counter, called for a glass of brandy and drank it, his victim on the floor at the time. Brand was shortly afterwards removed, and died at 4 o'clock in the evening of the shooting. Before leaving the saloon, O'Blenis sent for R. S. Blennerhassett, who was then and there retained as his chief counsel. He afterwards associated in the case Edward Bates and Uriel Wright. O'Blenis was arrested and lodged in the jail at the corner of Sixth and Chestnut Streets. The tragedy produced a profound sensation. It aroused the indignation of the community to the verge of desperation. On the night of the killing, a large and angry crowd surrounded the old jail, and there was reason to fear inob violence. Mr. Blennerhassett and others addressed them, and appealed to their calmer judgment to allow the law to take its course. The crowd dispersed and peace reigned. After the Coroner's inquest came the preliminary examination, which was heard before Mr. Mann Butler, Justice of the Peace, and author of "Cotton Is King." The prosecution was represented by the thien youthful City Attoney, James W. McBride, assisted by Mr. George W. Cline. The defense was mainly conducted by Mr. Blennerhassett. Nearly two weeks was taken up in this proceeding, the main object of Mr. Blennerhassett being to shape the case in a manner to obtain bail for his client. In this he failed, the Justice, at the conclusion of the examination, committing the accused without bail. Thereafter a second effort was made to secure bail, before Judge Lackland, by habeas corpus proceedings. After a lengthy hearing and able argu- ments by Mr. Henry A. Clover, the successor of Judge Lackland as Circuit Attorney, for the State, and Messrs. Blennerhassett and Wright for the defense, the application was refused, and O'Blenis remanded for trial on the charge of murder in the first degree. As an indication of the public feeling in this case, it is a noteworthy fact that the decision
96
THE HISTORY OF THE BENCH AND BAR OF MISSOURI.
of Judge Lackland on this occasion was greeted with applause, which inet with a stern rebuke from that dignitary.
This action of the committing magistrate and Judge Lackland aroused the ire and spurred the bull dog tenacity of Blennerhassett to such an extent that he afterwards bet Messrs. Sylvester La Beau and Daniel G. Taylor $500 that he would yet procure the release of his client on bail. According to my best recollection, Mr. Sylvester Papin was holder of stakes. The fact of the refusal to bail O'Blenis is an occurrence worthy of note. It shows that the high tide of reckless disregard in taking human life had been reached. It was a rare occurrence in Missouri or the South for a man of any influence and position, charged with felonious homicide, not to be allowed bail; and this but represented the senti- ment and social condition of the various communities. After the refusal on the part of Judge Lackland to grant bail, a change of venue was taken, and the case was tried at the old Central Engine House on Chestnut Street, Judge Hamilton, of the Circuit Court, pre- siding.
R. S. Blennerhassett, as stated, was the leading counsel for the defense. Mr. Blenner- hassett was born in Ireland, related to Herman Blennerhassett, charged with participation in the Burr conspiracy, and a second cousin of O'Connell, the Irish orator. He located in St. Louis as early as 1841, and commenced the practice of law. In 1848 he became City Counsellor, and held the office for three years. During his lifetime he was connected with many noted civil and criminal cases. He argued before the Supreme Court of Illinois the right of the City of St. Louis to fill up the channel east of Bloody Island, a work which gave to Illinois the valuable accretion on which so large a portion of the city stands. He successfully defended McLean, charged with the murder of Col. Floyd, an acquittal being had on the fourth trial. At the time of the O'Blenis trial, Mr. Blennerhassett was in his prime, and worked with a zeal and determination ahead of all his previous efforts. He held to the opinion that his client could not receive a fair trial because of the public feeling against him, growing out of his reputation as a man of violence. To overcome this and establish a theory of innocence, he put forth all of his varied powers and was backed by Messrs. Bates and Wright. Blennerhassett had not the rhetorical gifts of Wright, nor had he the pleasing, persuasive style of Bates; but there was a rugged strength in his oratory that neither of the others possessed. He was fluent and copious, with a sonorous voice, bitter in denunciation, strong in invective, and given at times to irony and sarcasmn. I was present as a student at this trial, and am convinced that Mr. Blennerhassett was the ablest cross-examiner that ever I heard question a witness. His command of temper under the inost irritating circumstances was marvelous. He never was disconcerted. His treatment of a witness was usually courteous, and by a series of adroit questions he would procure admissions highly beneficial to the defense. In person, he was heavy and strongly built, with large head, dark hair, inclined to curl, florid complexion, prominent and expressive eyes, and thoughtful face. He was careless in dress, and almost always, as was the habit in those days, had a quid of tobacco in his mouth.
For the State, against the formidable array of the defense, appeared Mr. Henry A. Clover. His first employment in St. Louis was to do clerical work under Gen. Ruland, Clerk of the Circuit Court. During this time he gave such attention as he could to the study of the law, and was admitted to the practice in 1847. He was afterwards City Attor- ney, member of the Legislature, Circuit Attorney, and Judge of the Criminal Court. The success he attained against the legal giants in those days is sufficient proof of his prowess.
97
RECOLLECTIONS OF THE CRIMINAL PRACTICE.
In the prosecution of O'Blenis he achieved decided reputation. He fought with wonderful skill and determination, and disputed step by step the efforts of his able opponents.
The court room was daily crowded, and the trial was a continuous theme for the newspapers and the general topic of conversation. Speculation was rife as to the outcome, and there were earnest partisans on both sides. The inarked features of the case showed murder of the first degree, but management of O'Blenis' attorneys compelled instructions for a less degree. The display of oratory was magnificent, and it is a lamentable circum- stance that none of the speeches were preserved. Clover had the advantage of the close, and he used it with wonderful effect. He had the sympathy of a large majority of the citi- zens of St. Louis, especially the better class, who were anxious to put a stop to the scenes of violence and bloodshed that were so frequently occurring. The trial was looked upon, by reason of the character of the defendant, as a test case, and predictions were made that a failure to convict would give the city over to ruffianism and disorder. The recognition of this fact and of his responsibility impelled Clover to his highest endeavors, and he was suc- cessful in getting a verdict for murder in the second degree.
Of course, there had been considerable difficulty in obtaining a jury, the particulars of the case having been so widely published and discussed; but, nevertheless, there were some strong men on the panel. It was learned, after the verdict was returned, that quite a time after their retirement the panel stood eleven for conviction of murder in the first degree- the penalty for which then, as now, was death by hanging-and one for murder in the second degree and a punishment of ten years in the penitentiary. The one man standing against the eleven was a member of an old and respected family of the city, an honest, earnest and conscientious man. He saved O'Blenis' life. A motion for a new trial was filed, and the following day O'Blenis was bailed, and Mr. Blennerhassett won his $500 bet. The case was taken to the Supreme Court on a very interesting point, and there Uriel Wright made the argument for reversal. That argument is in part set forth in the Seven- teenth Missouri Report, and is a monument of learning and eloquence. The judgment was affirmed by the opinions of Judges Leonard and Scott, Ryland dissenting, and O'Blenis served a number of years of his terin.
Blennerhassett had worked continuously to obtain pardon for his client. The night before his death, realizing his situation and hearing that Gov. Robert M. Stewart was in the city, he sent for and beseechied him as a dying request to pardon O'Blenis. The pecu- liar circumstances of the petition obtained from the Governor a promise to do so, whichi promise was shortly after carried out. This incident forcibly illustrates the zeal and tenacity with which Blennerhassett worked for his clients.
The effects of this trial are of marked historical importance. It commenced the work of a change in social conditions and practices. It was the beginning of the ending, and a rapid ending, of a class that reflected 110 credit on our civilization. O'Blenis, after liis release from imprisonment, lived many years, and conducted himself with decorum and propriety.
In the trial of this case, Henry A. Clover showed his ability to meet the giants of the bar. He was a prodigious worker. In this, he followed in the footsteps of Lackland. At that time, the Criminal Court had jurisdiction of both felonies and imisdemeanors, and they could be prosecuted only by indictments. At times, in those days, a Grand Jury would return as many as five, six, and sometimes seven hundred indictments. These were all disposed of by one Judge, and attended to by one Circuit Attorney. The amount of work
98
THE HISTORY OF THE BENCH AND BAR OF MISSOURI.
transacted in this court may be approximately computed from these facts. Besides exhib- iting remarkable industry in the discharge of the duties of his office, Clover prepared all important cases with great care. He was a hard student, and rarely in error in the prop- ositions of law he presented to a court. As a speaker, he was ready, vigorous and elaborate ; when excited, notably voluble, pouring forth sentences long enough to alarm a stenographer and to tax the attention of a Judge. He was very successful as a prosecutor, and his suc- cess raised him to the bench of the Criminal Court as the successor of Lackland. During Judge Clover's term, many important cases were tried, the particulars of which now pass in recollection through my mind. What an interesting volume inight be made by a collation and history of the many causas celebre that have occurred in the City of St. Louis alone. The details of many are buried in the Supreme Court Reports. Therein is written the never ceasing, restless, unreasoning and uncontrolled play of every evil passion that exists in the human heart. There is Lamb's case-the poor, self-accused, conscience-tormented mur- derer of his wife; there is Ostrander's case, whose life hung upon the Judge's colloquy with the foreman of the jury; there is Schoultz' case- the weak, deformed and sensitive cripple, born as one of nature's mockeries, expiating upon the scaffold the alleged crime of killing a bully, and doing it in malice, as the law claimed, for a previous administration of heartless and brutal malignity upon the part of his victim. Then there was the Thornton case. This case was tried during the term of Judge Clover, and is worthy of noticing to some extent.
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.