History of Essex and Hudson counties, New Jersey, Vol. I, Part 65

Author: Shaw, William H
Publication date: 1884
Publisher: [United States :]
Number of Pages: 840

USA > New Jersey > Essex County > History of Essex and Hudson counties, New Jersey, Vol. I > Part 65
USA > New Jersey > Hudson County > History of Essex and Hudson counties, New Jersey, Vol. I > Part 65

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).

Two years afterwards, the Governor took the matter in his own hands, and by virtue of the powers conferred upon him by his Commission, with the advice and consent of the Council, he adopted an Ordinance concerning the Court of Chancery, by which he appointed and commissioned such Masters, Clerks, Examiners, Registers and other necessary officers as were needed in said Court. There were no essential changes made in the provisions of this Ordinance even by the Constitution of July, 1776, which also united the offices of Governor and Chancellor, and this union continued until the adoption of our present Constitution, which separated these two ofhees and allowed a Governor to be chosen from any of the pro- fessions or vocations of life.

There is no evidence that, prior to 1733, any pre- vious term of study was required as a qualification for admission to the bar. In that year, during the administration of Governor Cosby, it is said by Judge Field in his work already quoted, that "it was pro- vided by an Act of Assembly, that no person should be permitted to practice as an attorney at law, but such as had served an apprenticeship of at least seven years with some able attorney licensed to practice, or had pursued the study of law for at least four years after coming of full age." If any such law was, at that time passed, it was no longer in force in 1752, as it does not appear in "Nevill's Laws," published in that year. The provision referred to by Judge Field was probably contained in the Act entitled " An Act for the better Enforcing an Ordinance made for Establishing of Fees and for Regulating the Practice of the Law," which was disallowed by the King in Council, April 3, 1735. Whatever has been done since that time, to keep "persons of mean parts and slender attainments" ont of the profession has been done not by acts of the Legislature, but by the Rules of the Supreme Court.

The lawyers of New Jersey were the first among all the inhabitants of the American Colonies to resist systematically those oppressive measures on the part of England which led to the Declaration of Independ- ence and the War of the Revolution. The first of the most odious of these measures was the Stamp Act which was passed by the British Parliament, March 22, 1765. Before the stamps had yet arrived from

England, the members of the bar, at the September Terin of the Supreme Court, ( 1765.) held at Amboy, met and resolved unanimously that they would not use the stamps under any circumstances or for any purposes whatsoever. When, at length, the stamps arrived, the lawyers refused to purchase them, and, as a matter-of-course, the Courts of Justice were all closed throughout New Jersey. Great inconvenience and great dissatisfaction was the result, not only in New Jersey but in the other Colonies where the example of the Jersey lawyers had been followed. The people complained, and societies were every where organized under the name of " Sons of Liberty " who urged the lawyers to go on with their business without the use of stamps. Of the lawyers, some were in favor of so doing, and others were opposed. A general meeting of the Bar was now called and held in New Brunswick, February 13th, 1766, and hundreds of the "Sons of Liberty " were present to encourage the lawyers to disregard this tyrannical act of Parliament, and to have the Courts of Justice once more opened. The result was that the Meeting resolved that if the Stamp Act was not repealed by the first of April following, they woukl resume their practice as usual. The British Govern- ment, not ignorant of this hold stand taken by the lawyers of New Jersey, repealed the odious act before the day arrived when they would have bid Parliament defiance.

But, brave and self-sacrificing as the lawyers of that period were, they found enemies, not a few, and serious were the charges made against them during the years that first followed their bearding of the British lion. In those days, people were just as fond of " going to law " as at present, and the same reasons operated then, as now : times would be bad; money would be scarce ; creditors would be clamorous ; debtors would be impudent, and lawyers, of course, would have plenty to do, and quite naturally pocket whatever cash might be still afloat. They grew rich, while creditors and debtors all grew poor. It was evident, of course, that there were too many law-suits, and that the lawyers were to blame for them. The lawyers' fees were exorbitant ; they swallowed all the money on both sides of the suit ; they were a pack of scoundrels; "go for them, boys!" was the cry on every hand. And they did "go for them." The best and purest members of the bar were accused of taking illegal fees. Charges were brought against them before the General Assembly. Numbers of them were ordered to answer at the bar of the House, and long and tedious exami- nations were the result. In only one instance was a conviction found and that was in the case of Mr. Bernardus Legrange, and even in this case it was sub- sequently found that the convietion was unjust, and an entry to that effect was ordered to be made on the minutes of the House.

But the enemies of the lawyers, unable to obtain satisfaction before the Asserubly, finally resorted to

238

HISTORY OF ESSEX COUNTY, NEW JERSEY.

Chief Justices of the Colonial Supreme Court of New Jersey .- The Chief Justices of New Jersey were not, with one exception, residents of Essex County, and we can therefore, do little more than mention their names in the order in which they held that high office.

violence. At Freehold, in July 1869, they assembled in crowds, before the Court House, and tried to pre- vent the lawyers from entering, but they were sub- dued through the efforts of Richard Stockton, who caused the ringleaders to be punished. At the com- mencement of the following year similar riots also took place in Essex County, at which time the stable Under the first Constitution, that is, during the provincial period of our history, no such office existed, nor was there any court corresponding exactly with the Supreme Court erected under the Ordinance pro- mulgated by Lord Cornbury in 1704. It was under this ordinance that the office was created, and the first session of the Supreme Court of New Jersey was held at Burlington on the seventh day of November, 1740. On that day the first Chief Justice of New Jersey, William Pinhorne beside him as associate Judge. Their commissions were read, and the court then ad- journed till the next day, when the Sheriff of Burling- ton County returned a Grand Jury, and a charge to them was delivered by the Chief Justice. The busi- ness of that session was, however, very light. Not even one indictment was found, nor was there a single case ready for trial. Several gentlemen, nevertheless had the courage to seek admission to the bar, and were admitted. The court then adjourned to the first Tuesday of May succeeding. and out-houses of David Ogden were burned. The rioters in this case were secured and promptly pun- ished. A second assault was now made upon the Court and Bar at Freehold. The rioters entered the Court House armed with clubs and missiles of various kinds, and drove the attorneys from the bar, threaten- ing them with personal violence. The court, in this instance, being broken up and all its proceedings stopped, Governor Franklin felt himself obliged to ! Roger Mompesson, took his seat upon the bench, with call a special session of the General Assembly in order that " an Act be passed for reviving and continuing the process and proceeding." In his message to the As- sembly on this occasion, Governor Franklin compli- ments the officers and people of Essex County as follows: " Besides these riots in Monmouth, there was one of a similar nature in Essex, on the 9th of last January, but by the virtuous and spirited conduct of the Sheriff, Magistrates and a number of the well dis- posed inhabitants of the County, the rioters were suppressed, and many of them bound over, to answer to the next court." In reply to this message of the Governor, the General Assembly, after assuring him of their willingness to comply with the requests therein contained, add : " And we cannot but express the great satisfaction we feel at the virtuous conduct and spirit shown by the Magistrates, Sheriff' and People of the County of Essex in suppressing the first appear- ance of riot in that County; had a like spirit been exerted in Momnouth, it probably had prevented the disturbances since."

ROGER MOMPESSON was an English lawyer of some note in his native land even before leaving it to make a residence in the colonies. He had been the Re- corder of Southampton, and a member of two several Parliaments. It was at the instance of William Penn that he left England in 1703 with a commission for Chief Justice of Pennsylvania in his pocket; but the people of that colony were not inclined to receive him, and the next year Lord Cornbury becoming Governor of New York and New Jersey, made him the Chief Justice of both those provinces October 2, 1704. He soon became Lord Cornbury's legal adviser, and when Lewis Morris was turned out of the coun- cil by the Governor, Mompesson was made a member of that Board. But after his expulsion from the council, Lewis Morris became a member of the Gene- ral Assembly; and then his attack upon Cornbury was conducted with so much skill and vigor, that Queen Anne graciously removed him and appointed Lord Lovelace in his stead. Chief Justice Mompes- son, who had defended the odious conduct of Corn- bury, now fearing a fate similar to that of the gov- ernor, surrendered his commission.

Judge Field, in commenting upon these riots, says : " It might be worth while to inquire whether those who thus made war upon the lawyers, were equally ready to take up arms against the enemies of their Country, in the contest which soon followed. We know there were a good many Tories in the County of Monmouth, as well as in other parts of the State; and if the truth were known, I suspect it would be found, that among those who took sides with the British, were included most of the individuals who were engaged in those riotous proceedings. Nor is this mere conjecture. The same thing happened precisely in North Carolina when, in 1771, a body of men, to the number of about fifteen hundred, ealling themselves "Regulators," and THOMAS GORDON was appointed Chief Justice by Lord Lovelace, on the resignation of Mompesson, 1709. He held the office, however, but one year, and this was, doubtless, because he felt his inability to discharge its duties. It is true he had filled many posi- tions of honor and trust-had been Clerk of the Court of Common Right, Register of the Court of Chancery, Judge of Probate, Attorney General of the Province complaining of the oppressions attending the practice of the law, rose in arms, for the purpose of extermi- nating lawyers and shutting up the Courts of justice. And yet most of these very persons, in the Revolu- tion, joined the royal party, and enlisted under the King's banners. Nor should this surprise us. The freedom for which our fathers contended, was not an unlicensed freedom, but a liberty regulated by law." | of East Jersey and Speaker of the House of Assem-

230

BENCH AND BAR OF ESSEX COUNTY.

bly, yet he had not been bred to the bar, although he was licensed as an attorney at the first session of the Supreme Court. lle resigned his seat upon the Bench, to accept the appointment of Receiver General and Treasurer of the Province. Ilis death occurred in 1722.

DAVID JAMISON was the third Chief Justice of New Jersey, and took his seat upon the Bench in Feb- ruary, 1710. He was, at the time, a lawyer, prac- tieing in the City of New York, and filled the office of Chief Justice for thirteen years. At a term of the Supreme Court held in 1715, a Quaker grand juror was challenged for refusing to take the oath. Hle claimed the benefit of an Act of Assembly, passed some years before, which provided that the solemn affirmation of a Quaker should be accepted in lien of an oath, and Justice Jamison, overruling the chal- lenge, directed the clerk to take the affirmation of the juror. The clerk positively refused to do so, where- npon the Chief Justice fined the clerk for contempt of Court. Through the influence of Lord Cornbury's friends, who hold the General Assembly, the Chief Justice was, for this, indicted, at the next Court of Quarter Sessions. The indictment was removed into the Supreme Court, and there, Associate Justice Farmer presiding, it was quashed. None of the judi- cial opinions of Chief Justice Jamison have been pre- served. lle was an upright Judge, somewhat puri- tanical, and disposed to harange grand jurors on the heinousness of witcheraft which he placed in the list of capital offences. But the grand juries of New Jersey never disgraced common sense by meddling with that matter.

WILLIAM TRENT succeeded Justice Jamison, No- vember 23, 1723, as Chief Justice. He lived, how- ever, but little more than a year after receiving his appointment, his death occurring from an attack of apoplexy, December 25, 1724. He was not a lawyer by profession, although he had been for many years a Judge of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, and Speaker of the House of Assembly. A Scotchman by birth, he came to this country at an early day, and settled in Philadelphia, where he became a very successful merchant. In 1714 he purchased eight hundred acres of land, upon which now stands the City of Trenton, which received its name from him, being originally called Trent's Town. In 1721 he represented the County of Burlington in the General Assembly, and in 1723 was Speaker of the House.

ROBERT LETTICE HOOPER was appointed by Giov- ernor Burnet Chief Justice, January 1, 1724, at which time he was a member of the House of Assembly, After holding the office three years, Thomas Farmar was appointed to succeed him. Hooper was, how- ever, reappointed in 1729, and held the office until his death, which occurred in 1738.

THOMAS FARMAR received the appointment of Chief Justice in 1728. During his term of office he also represented the County of Middlesex in the General

AAssembly, there being, at the time, nothing to pre- vent a Judge of the Supreme Court from holding a seat in the Legislature. Judge Farmar was, for some years, insane, and may have been removed from the Bench for this reason.

ROBERT HUNTER MORRIS Was the seventh Chief Jus- tice of New Jersey, receiving his commission March 13, 1738. He was the son of the distinguished Lewis Morris, Governor of New Jersey, and held the office of Chief Justice for twenty-six years, during which time, however, he was about eight years in England and two years Governor of Pennsylvania. His first visit to England was at the request of the Council, and its object was to defeat a contemplated plan for placing New Jersey and New York again under the same gover- nor. After an absence of five years he returned, bearing with him the commission of Governor of Pennsylva- nia. On receiving this commission, he tendered his resignation as Chief Justice to the Lords of Trade, but the resignation was not accepted, and in 1756 having relinquished his position as Governor of Pennsylvania he resumed his duties as Chief Justice of New Jersey, the Bench having been, in the mean- time, filled by his AAssociate .Justices, Samuel Nevil and Richard Faltar. In 1757, Chiet Justice Morris made another visit to England, and the following year, the Governor of the Province, Jonathan Belcher, dying, a sort of provisional government ensned, during which William Aynsley was appointed Chief Justice. He died, however, within a year, and while Mr. Mor- ris was still in England, one Nathaniel Jones receiv- ing then a commission as Chief Justice, set sail for New Jersey, and at the next term of Court, after his arrival, March, 1760, walked into the court-room to take possession of the Beach, when he found it al- ready occupied by Chief Justice Morris, who had un- expectedly returned, and who claimed that he was appointed March 13, 1735, to the office of Chief Jus- tice, to hold the same during good behaviour. It was an extraordinary state of affairs, but it was promptly decided by Mr. Justice Nevil, the Associate Judge, who, assuming the presidenev, caused the commis- sions of the two claimants to be read, and instantly announced as the opinion of the Court that since nothing had been shown to deprive Mr. Morris of his freehold in the office of Chief Justice, conferred upon him by his commission, the Court could not ad- minister the oath of office to Mr. Jones ; but would leave his claim to be determined by due course of law. Mr. Jones left, and was heard of no more, and Mr. Morris continued upon the Bench, as Chief Jus- tice, until his death, which occurred January 27, 1764.

WILLIAMS AYNSLEY, as stated above, became Chief Justice in 1758. The Province was, at the time, with- ont any Governor, and the government was adminis- tered by the Council. He neted as Chief Justice during the March term of 1758, and during the term following, soon after which he died.

CHARLES READ, the ninth Chief Justice of New

240

HISTORY OF ESSEX COUNTY, NEW JERSEY.

Jersey, received his commission as such on the 20th of February, 1764, and was, at the time, an Associate Justice. He occupied this position only until the following October, when he was displaced and returned to his seat upon the Bench as Associate Justice.

FREDERICK SMYTH was the last of the Provincial Chief Justices of New Jersey. He received his Com- mission October 17, 1764, and remained in office until the adoption of the Constitution of 1776. It was dur- ing his term of office that the Stamp AAct was passed ; and it was before him that the serious complaints against the lawyers, elsewhere spoken of, were made. He enjoyed a high reputation as a lawyer and a judge, but he was a thorough and consistent loyalist, and in his charges to the Grand Jury, during those eventful tintes, took no pains to conceal it. On the breaking out of the Revolution, he removed to Philadelphia, where he died.

Chief Justices of New Jersey during and after the Revolution .- After the adoption of the Constitu- tion of 1776, considerable dithiculty was experienced in organizing the Courts of the new State. The legis- lature, in joint meeting, elected RICHARD STOCKTON, an eminent lawyer and patriot, as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, but he declined the appointment. A few days afterwards, September 4th, 1776, the same body elected John De Hart to that high office, and although he accepted it, he finally declined to enter upon its duties. On the same day, Samuel Tucker and Francis Hopkinson were elected Associate Jus- tives. Mr. Hopkinson, who was, at the time, a dele- gate to the Continental Congress, declined; but Mr. Tucker accepted, and taking the oath of office, held a term of the Court in November following. The re- gular terms of the Court just prior to this time, hav- ing been interrupted, acts of Assembly were passed reviving and continuing the process and proceedings depending therein. Mr. Tucker did not continue loug upon the Bench. A difficulty arose between him and Governor Livingstone iu regard to the disappearance of a large amount of paper currency and other pro- perty in Mr. Tucker's custody as State Treasurer. Mr. Tucker's allegation that he had been robbed of it by a party of British horsemen who had taken him pri- soner, was disputed by tiovernor Livingstone, and thereupon Mr. Tucker resigned his commission.

ROBERT MORRIS was the first Chief Justice of New Jersey who was elected under the Constitution aud who took his seat upon the Bench. His commission was dated February 5, 1777. He was the son of Robert Hunter Morris, Chief Justice from 1738 to 1764. Ilis positiou seems to have been irksome to him, and, in a letter to Governor Livingstone written a few months after receiving his commission he says : " I accepted my present office to manifest my resolu- tion to serve my country. I mean to do the duty of it while I hold it according to my best judgment. When- ever the legislature think they can fill it more advan- tageously, the tenor of my commission shall not dis- appoint them." In 1779 he resigned.

DAVID BREARLY succeeded Judge Morris as Chief Justice, June 10, 1779. He was, at the time of his election, a Lieutenant Colonel in Maywell's Brigade of the Jersey line; and it was with some difficulty that he was persuaded to resign his commission in the army, in order to accept that of Chief Justice. How- ever, being a lawyer and only thirty-four years of age, he soon became at home upon the Bench, and hekl the office of Chief Justice nearly eleven years. In November 1789, he resigned, having been appointed Judge of the United States District Court for New Jersey, which office he held until his death in 1790, at the age of forty-five.

JAMES KINSEY was, upon the resignation of Mr. Brearly, elected Chief Justice by the joint meeting, November 20, 1789, and held the office until 1803, when he died at the age of about seventy years. He was, in 1772, a member of the Assembly from the County of Burlington ; and in 1774 was one of the delegates to the Continental Congress.

ANDREW KIRKPATRICK was elected Chief Jus- tice November 3, 1803, and occupied that position twenty-one years, having been twice re-elected thereto. He was not only distinguished as a fine scholar, but as a profoundly learned lawyer and care- ful judge. Before his election to the Chief Justice- ship he had been six years Associate Justice, making the whole time which he sat upon the Bench of the Supreme Court twenty-seven years. He died in 1831.

CHARLES EWING was the successor of Justice Kirkpatrick, and received his commission October 29, 1824. He was a mau who won the respeet and love of every one about him, and when his term of seven years as Chief Justice had expired, he was re-elected by a joint-meeting opposed to him in politics. He died, however, of cholera in less than a year after his' re-election. Judge Elmer, in his "Reminiscences of the Bench and Bar," says concerning him : "The resolu- tions usually adopted at a meeting of the Bench and Bar upon the retirement or death of a judge, are not always the most reliable evidence of his true charae- ter; but those recorded in the minutes of the Court in the case of Charles Ewing are remarkably dis- eriminating and just." They are : "Associated with him for a long course of years as a pleader, an advocate, and a judge, we are all able to bear witness to his in- dustry, his wisdom and his worth. His deep devo- tion to the truth; his untiring patience in its pur- suit ; his serupulous fidelity to the performance of the various duties of his station; his sound, discrim- inating, vigorous and capacious mind; his great and extensive learning in the science of jurisprudence ; his unyielding, uncompromising, jealous integrity and purity of character; his modesty, courtesy and dig- nity present such an assemblage of the peculiar virtues and talents required in the due and faithful adminis- tration of justice that we know not where to look upon his fellow."

BENCH AND BAR OF ESSEX COUNTY.

241

JOSEPH C. HORNBLOWER was the only Chief Jus- tice of New Jersey who was a native and a resi- dent of Essex County. In accordance with the plan of this work, it is therefore proper to give to him a biographical sketch as full as our limits will permit.

Judge Hornblower was born in Belleville, N. J., May 6th, 1777, and was the youngest son of Hon. Josiah Hornblower, who was a civil engineer by pro- fession and a member of the State Legislature as well as a delegate to the Continental C'ongress. The health of young Hornblower was from childhood very feeble, and for this reason he was deprived of the advantages of a collegiate education, but the greatest pains were taken to give him all possible instruction in the clas- sies and in mathematics. As he grew oller, his health

State. On the death of Mr. Justice Ewing, Mr. Horn blower was elected by the joint-meeting Chief Justice, Nov. 1. 1832; and was re-elected in 1-39, making hi- full term of service upon the Bench fourteen years. During this long period he rendered many and very important decisions, which have been attended with beneficial results in this as well as in other States Among these he laid down the law to be, that it does not constitute a good cause of challenge to a juror, that he has formed and expressed an opinion of the guilt of the prisoner founded upon his knowledge of the facts, or upon information supposed to be true; and this decision was sustained by a full bench of the Supreme Court. In 1556 he decided that Congress had no right to pass a fugitive slave law, a decision, which,

JOSEPH C. HORNBLOWER.

improved, and he entered the employ of a brother-in- law ,in New York who was engaged in mercantile business. Not finding this altogether in accordance with his tastes, he determined to study law, and re- turning to New Jersey, entered as a student, the office of David B. Ogden who was, at that time, a leading ad- vocate in Newark, N. J. With this gentleman, who afterwards became so distinguished as a lawyer, he studied during the prescribed term of five years and was admitted as an attorney in 1803, and as a coun- selor in 1806. He became associated with his pre- ceptor as a partner, even before his admission to the bar, and it was not long, before he was regarded as one of the ablest and most successful lawyers of the

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 Essex and Hudson counties, New Jersey, Vol. I, Part 65

Author: Shaw, William H Publication date: 1884 Publisher: [United States :] Number of Pages: 840

Author: Shaw, William H
Publication date: 1884
Publisher: [United States :]
Number of Pages: 840