Bi-centennial history of Albany. History of the county of Albany, N. Y., from 1609 to 1886. With portraits, biographies and illustrations, Part 42

Author: Howell, George Rogers, 1833-1899; Tenney, Jonathan, 1817-1888
Publication date: 1886
Publisher: New York, W. W. Munsell & Co.
Number of Pages: 1452

USA > New York > Albany County > Albany > Bi-centennial history of Albany. History of the county of Albany, N. Y., from 1609 to 1886. With portraits, biographies and illustrations > Part 42

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).

Through all his college course it was evident that the mind of Mr. Harris was gravitating to- ward the legal profession. At this time the Hon. Ira Harris, his brother, afterward one of the ablest and most eminent of the Judiciary of the State and a United States Senator, was and had been for a long time in the midst of an extensive practice at the Albany Bar. Young Harris entered his law office as a student, where he carefully and labori- ously prepared for his admission to the Bar. His call to practice took place in 1845. Having de- cided to make Albany his future residence, he opened an office in that city and began the practice of his profession.

Though surrounded by learned, experienced and gifted rivals, the progress of his reputation was soon a matter of common remark ; he seemed to pos- sess a natural adaptation for legal polemics ; he entered the contests of the Bar with an industry which no excess of toil could weary, and with a self-command and practical ability which showed that he possessed in extenso the qualities and ac- quirements which would soon render him an accomplished advocate. He gradually exhibited a masculine eloquence which ignored superfluous decoration and fancy, alike strong in reason, at- tractive in ethical beauty and logical skill.

The following are his business connections which have diversified his legal life. In 1848 he became a partner with Hooper C. Van Vorst, afterward a Judge of the Common Pleas of New York City. This relation was dissolved in 1853 by the removal

163

THE BENCH AND BAR.

of Mr. Van Vorst to the City of New York. Soon after this he was associated with Samuel G. Court- ney, a son-in-law of Daniel S. Dickinson, and for several years United States District Attorney for the Southern District of New York.

In 1857 he formed a copartnership with those brilliant lawyers, Clark B. Cochrane and John H. Reynolds. This was one of the strongest legal firms that ever existed in Albany.

During this connection Mr. Cochrane and Mr. Reynolds both became Members of Congress. The copartnership ended with Mr. Cochrane's death in 1867, but Mr. Harris and Mr. Reynolds continued their association till the latter's death in 1875.

Mr. Harris has now associated with him in the practice of his profession his son, Frederick Harris, and William P. Rudd.

In the autumn of 1853 he was nominated and elected District Attorney of Albany County, serv- ing until January 1, 1857. Mr. Harris' adminis- tration of this important office is remembered as largely enhancing his reputation and advantageous to the public. During his administration he conducted several of the most important and stubbornly contested prosecutions for murder ever tried at the Albany Bar ; indeed, we know of few more important cases in legal history.

Among these was the trial of the People vs. Hendrickson, indicted for the murder of his wife by poison, in 1853, and the several trials of Mc- Cann for the murder of his wife in 1856.

Mr .. Harris entered upon his duties as District Attorney of Albany County on the first day of Jan- uary, 1854. Hendrickson had been tried and con- victed of murder in the first degree, but the prisoner, through his counsel-Hon. John K. Porter-had brought error to the Court of Appeals, and it had not been argued when Mr. Harris entered upon his duties, and the duty of conducting it in the Appellate Court fell upon him.

Mrs. Hendrickson died suddenly at Bethlehem on the morning of March 7, 1853. She was dis- covered by her husband dead in bed, at about two o'clock in the morning. He aroused the family, who saw by her appearance that she had been dead but a few moments. In the evening of that day, at the Coroner's inquest, Hendrickson stated under oath the circumstances of her death. He said he went to church with her in the afternoon of the day previous, returning in the evening ; his wife complained of ill-health, retiring about eleven o'clock. He awoke at about two in the morning by a noise in the barn. On speaking to his wife, he found her motionless, and her face cold ; thinking her dead, he alarmed the family.

When asked as to his having been in Albany, he said : "I was there two weeks ago last Saturday." " Have you been there since?" After pretending to reflect, he said : "Oh, yes, I think I was there one week ago last Saturday." " Have you not been there since ? He replied : " I was there last Saturday." When asked what he went for, he said he took a load of timber to the mills there ; his brother was with him ; he then gave the names of the different places he visited with his brother.

He did not remember going to Springstead's drug store, nor any other drug store. When the ques- tion was again directly put to him, "Were you not in some drug store in Albany ?" he was in a some- what reclining position in his chair, as if grieving ; the question seemed to startle him, and, after some hesitation, he finally replied: " I do not remember." On the trial, the People offered to prove the state- ments of Hendrickson before the coroner. The evidence was objected to as inadmissible, but the Court admitted it under an exception. The Peo- ple offered to prove, as a motive for the act, that Lawrence Van Duzen, the father of Mrs. Hen- drickson, by his last will, gave all his property to his wife for life, with a remainder over, one-half to his only son, the other half to be equally di- vided between Mrs. Hendrickson and her sister. This evidence was objected to, but admitted under an exception. This case required in the counsel for the People, not only great legal learning, but a thorough acquaintance with medical jurispru- dence, particularly in the science of toxicology, as it was insisted that the victim died from the effects of strychnine. Hendrickson was con- victed, as before stated, and sentenced to be hanged.

The duty of conducting this case in the Appel- late Court placed Mr. Harris in a most responsible position, involving much labor and learning. The counsel for the defense relied upon their ex- ceptions to the admission of the evidence we have referred to as involving sufficient error to give them a new trial.

The exhaustive and admirably prepared brief of Mr. Harris, and its logical reference to authorities, on which was founded a very able argument, fully sustained the rulings of the Judge at the trial, and in due time the decision of the Court was handed down, affirming the conviction of Hendrickson. The case was reported in 10 N. Y. Reports, 13.

The trials of McCann, for the murder of his wife, which took place July 8, 1856, was another great case. On the morning following her death, the dead body of Mrs. McCann, the wife of the prison- er, was found on the floor of one of the rooms in the house occupied by him and his wife, with a ghastly wound over the right eye, which fractured the skull and opened the brains. There were eight wounds on her head, disfiguring her to such an extent that those who knew her best could hardly recognize her. Suspicion at once fell upon McCann. There were several strong motives proven that induced him to commit the murder, and it was evidently done with deliberation-as the law has it, "with malice prepense." He was in- dicted and brought to trial at a Court of Oyer and Terminer, in November, 1856. Mr. Harris as District Attorney appeared for the People ; Hon. Lyman Tremain, Hon. Rufus W. Peckham and J. M. Kimball, Esq., conducted the defense, which was insanity. It was insisted by the defense that McCann killed his wife while suffering from delirium tremens, under the delusion that he was resisting the attack of persons determined to kill him. There were several circumstances proved

164

HISTORY OF THE COUNTY OF ALBANY.

which the defense insisted established this theory, one of which was that McCann used two axes in killing his wife, or rather that he killed her with one ax and chopped her to pieces with another ; that he seized them both to fight the men whom he believed were assaulting him. He made no attempt at flight, but remained near the body of his victim nearly all night. Neither did he make any attempt to conceal the body.

The defense of delirium tremens was held to be no defense until Chief-Justice Story laid down the law which settled that a man committing a crime, suffering under this disease, is not responsible for it.

The defense summoned to the trial some of the ablest physicians of the times, including Dr. Alden March, Dr. Thomas Hun, Dr. S. O. Vanderpoel, Dr. J. Swinburne and Dr. B. P. Staats.

It is said that Mr. Tremain never in the course of all his practice made a more powerful defense than on this trial. Mr. Harris, however, was equal to the occasion. His cross-examination and examination of the medical witnesses might easily have caused a stranger to believe him some emi- nent physician, experienced in treating cases of in- sanity, so ready was his understanding of that disease.

The medical testimony was. of great value, and has been repeatedly used as precedent in similar cases, particularly that of Dr. Hun. It is doubt- ful whether the subject of delirium tremens was ever more admirably dissected or more ably ex- plained than on this trial.

McCann was convicted and sentenced to be hanged.

The execution was fixed by the judges on Janu- ary 23, 1857. A few days before the execution was to take place his counsel removed his case to the General Term, where the conviction of McCann was affirmed. From the judgment of the General Term his counsel brought error to the Court of Appeals, and after argument of Messrs. Peckham & Tremain on the part of the defense, and of Mr. Harris on the part of the People, a new trial was ordered.

The new trial commenced in November, 1857. Another long and exciting contest took place, re- sulting in the disagreement of the jury. In March, 1858, McCann was again placed at the bar for trial, and for the third time the public interest was aroused over this truly great case. This trial, like the second, resulted in a disagreement of the jury, there being eleven for conviction and one for ac- quittal. The jury deliberated nearly sixty-three hours, and during all this time the one juror stood alone against the pressure of his fellows.

To use the language of a leading journal of the day :

"The case was summed up for the defense by the Hon. R. W. Peckham in a most admirable manner. He was followed by Hon. Hamilton Harris on the part of the Peo- ple. The intense earnestness and powerful eloquence of this gentleman gave him in this case, as in all others, great influence with the jury."

A proposition was finally made to have McCann plead guilty to manslaughter in the first degree,

which was accepted by Mr. Harris, and the pris- oner was sentenced to State Prison for life. Thus ended a trial which is without precedent in the criminal trials of the State. The case is reported in 16 N. Y. Reports, 58, and is regarded as an im- portant and leading one.

Among other important murder cases which Mr. Harris conducted were those of The People vs. Phelps, The People vs. McCrossen, The People vs. Dunnigan and The People vs. Cummings. In all these cases Mr. Harris was opposed by the ablest lawyers of the time. The success that at- tended him sufficiently attests his accomplishments as a prosecuting officer. The comments of the press upon the manner in which he conducted his arduous duties are gratifying testimonials.

One important criminal case in which Mr. Harris appeared against the prosecution was the case of The People vs. Reimann, indicted for com- plicity in the murder of Emil Hartung. Reimann was at first indicted as accessory before the mur- der, the principal being Mrs. Hartung, wife of the deceased, but he was subsequently indicted as principal for causing Hartung's death by adminis- tering to him arsenical poison. The case created great interest ; indeed, there were features in it which invested it with dramatic interest.

Mr. Harris appeared for the defense ; the prose- cution was conducted by District Attorney Ira Shaffer, assisted by Samuel G. Courtney.

Mrs. Hartung had been convicted of the murder of her husband by poisoning, and was sentenced to be hanged. It was contended by the counsel for the People that Reimann was her guilty paramour. She was a handsome and attractive woman, with whom Reimann was passionately in love, and he aided in the taking off of her husband, to permit him to marry her. Much time was consumed in obtaining a jury, and more in taking the evidence. After the people rested, Mr. Harris made a motion for the discharge of Reimann on the ground that the evidence was insufficient to convict him. The motion was supported by an elaborate and cogent argument, to which Mr. Courtney replied with force and eloquence. The Hon. George Gould, who presided at the trial, after a learned and criti- cal review of the whole evidence and the argument of the respective counsel, granted Mr. Harris' motion, and Reimann was discharged. But there were two more indictments against him ; one for being accessory before the fact, the other for being accessory after the fact, and he was remanded to jail. A motion soon followed to admit him to bail, and another sharp legal contest ensued. He was finally discharged.

A history of the causes celebres in which Mr. Harris has been engaged has filled volumes, inter- esting to both practitioner and student. From 1816 down to 1876 there had been forty-three murder cases tried in the County of Albany, and Mr. Harris appeared as the leading counsel in no less than ten, either for the People or the defense.

Though he is not what might be termed a criminal lawyer, it has been his fortune, as we have seen, to be engaged in very many important crimi-

165

THE BENCH AND BAR.

nal trials. This practice has always had strong at- tractions for accomplished legal minds ; it gives ample room for the exercise of well-disciplined imagination and sympathy ; it gives scope to a critical knowledge of the Statute laws, common law and the law of evidence. It requires a deep insight into the springs of human action ; therefore no man can become a really successful criminal lawyer without becoming equally successful in other departments of practice.

By a well-sustained progress Mr. Harris has at- tained a reputation in the trial and argument of civil actions that ranks him among the ablest law- yers of his time.

As he advanced in his profession he devoted himself exclusively to civil business, to the entire exclusion of the criminal, and the result has been that he has enjoyed for a long time an extensive and lucrative practice as well as a high reputation in the courts. The reported cases in the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals argued by him show in some degree the extent of the business and the magnitude of the cases in which he has been engaged and the important questions of the law which he has argued. The following quotations from leading newspapers express the public esti- mate of Mr. Harris as an advocate. The Albany Press of January 6, 1884, in a review of the law- yers of Albany, says of Mr. Harris: "He is an able and adroit lawyer, logical in argument and brilliant in speech. He excels more especially" as a jury lawyer, and as such ranks among the best at our bar." The Albany Evening Journal of January 17, 1885, in speaking of Mr. Harris' law firm, said :

"It possesses probably the largest and most lucrative patronage, and is one of the most successful firms in Albany. To this result Senator Harris' eminent ability as a pleader, his thorough knowledge of the law, his forensic powers and his winning personality have largely contributed."

The Albany Argus of May 10, 1885, in com- menting upon an important railway case then be- ing tried at the Circuit Court, spoke of Mr. Harris as follows :

" No man could study a case harder than does Hamilton Harris. He masters every detail of fact, knows exactly what his witnesses will testify to, and as for the law, long experience in this class of cases has made him, so to speak, an encyclopedia of railroad decisions. Hamilton Harris' manner in court is quiet and highly dignified. He pays close attention to the conduct of the case. His voice is strong and harsh to one unaccustomed to hear him speak, and his style of delivery is plain, but earnest and effective. His manner is blunt, gruff and, to a certain extent, dicta- torial; but no juryman ever sat in a box and listened to him through a case without feeling that, back of his manner, was not only great power of mind, but an honest, kindly heart. Few lawyers conduct a case with so much earnestness. When you hear him speak, you feel immediately that he is in earnest. This quality and his shrewdness and policy make him one of the most successful lawyers that ever de- fended a corporation."

Our space will not permit of a general review of the important civil cases in which he has been en- gaged. We shall only allude to two of the later ones, which were of great public interest, and in which Mr. Harris won great distinction throughout the State.

During the Legislative session of 1884 William McDonald was arraigned at the bar of the Senate for refusing to answer questions before a Legisla- tive committee. He was committed by the Senate to imprisonment in the common jail for contempt. In proceedings taken in the courts for his release Mr. Harris appeared as one of his counsel, and his argument for McDonald, which required and re- ceived at his hands as much research and learning as has been displayed in any case brought before the courts in late years, greatly extended his repu- tation as a profound lawyer. The commitment was declared by the General Term of the Supreme Court illegal, and McDonald was discharged. The case is reported in 32 Hun, 563.

During the Legislative session of 1882 Mr. Roosevelt preferred charges against Mr. Justice Westbrook, of the State Supreme Court, for misfeas- ance and malfeasance in the discharge of his judicial duties. It was alleged, among other things, that the Judge, "Without stint and without regard to judicial propriety, had appointed relatives to office, in which they had received large fees ; that he had been guilty of judicial impropriety in the celebrated Manhattan Elevated Railroad case ; that he had improperly given advice aiding the defense of the Manhattan Company, and that he had im- properly informed Jay Gould and others touching certain actions of the Court." The charges against the Judge, taken together, made a strong prima facie case against him. The alleged facts were in- geniously marshaled and strengthened by accu- mulated allegations. They were sent to the Judi- ciary Committee of the Assembly for investigation, after a spirited debate.

Mr. Harris was retained by Judge Westbrook to conduct his case before the committee. The in- vestigation before the committee began on April 21, 1882, and finally closed on the 27th of the following May, Mr. Harris making the closing argument.

Judging from the comments of the press, his ar- gument was one of extraordinary power and elo- quence. The Troy Press, speaking of it, says : " The argument of Mr. Harris was very able, and exposed the wickedness and absurdity of the charges against Judge Westbrook." The Albany Evening Journal says : "There can be no answer to Mr. Harris' defense of Judge Westbrook, the only counsel before the committee who can be truly said to enjoy a large experience in his pro- fession."

The New York World of May 29, in an able re- view of the case, said : "Mr. Hamilton Harris' argument in vindication of Judge Westbrook fills a closely printed pamphlet of nearly fifty pages ; but so close and clear is his presentation of the case, that no lawyer will object to its length." After quoting to some extent from the argument, the re- view continues its favorable comment upon it, and the whole article is highly complimentary to Mr. Harris. The Judge was honorably acquitted.

We have thus given a sketch of Mr. Harris as a lawyer. We shall now briefly consider his politi- cal career, which, though extended, has been sub- ordinate to his profession.

166-

HISTORY OF THE COUNTY OF ALBANY.

Quite early in life he became prominent in the Whig party in Albany County, advocating its measures on the platform and with his pen with such fidelity and ability that he soon took his place among the leaders of the party in the county and State. In the autumn of 1850 he was elected member of Assembly from the County of Albany. It was at this session of the Legislature that the building of the State Library and the improvement of the State Capitol became a prominent subject of legislation. Its success was largely due to the efforts of Mr. Harris. He was also a member of the joint committee of six to call State conventions and to construct a new party platform, which was one of the first steps in the formation of the Re- publican party. Mr. Harris aided largely in founding the Republican party, and has always been justly regarded as one of its strongest and ablest champions. From 1862 to 1870 he was a mem- ber of the Republican State Committee ; from 1862 to 1864 he was chairman of the Executive Com- mittee ; from 1864 to 1870 he was chairman of the Republican State Committee, in which position he displayed great executive ability, and by his skillful political management more than once led his party to victory in closely contested State elections. As has been said of him by a prominent writer : " His keen intuitions and his rare skill as an organizer, with a singular union of discretion with boldness, render him a natural leader of men." As a delegate in many State and national conventions, Mr. Har- ris was active and strongly influential in sustaining the measures of his party.

At the Legislative session of 1865 the question of erecting a new capitol at Albany, which had been agitated for many previous sessions, culmi- nated in more decisive action. Mr. Harris was elected President of a new Board of Capitol Com- missioners, serving until 1875 with ability and success so marked that he has been frequently termed "The Father " of that great measure. The Buffalo Commercial Advertiser, commenting upon the subject, says : "Let the people of Albany re- member that to Hamilton Harris more than any other man they are indebted for the new capitol from its inception in 1865 to its progress in 1879.

To this the Albany Evening Journal made answer : "Never fear : Albanians will always remember it." The Albany Express, speaking of Mr. Harris' labors in behalf of the new capitol, says : "In other hands all the doubtful elements of the sitna- tion would have worked against it. Not so in the hands of Mr. Harris. The leader of the Senate, by force of character, and with a strong cause com- mitted to him, his uniform courtesy and persistent labor carried the project through the crisis." The Albany Evening Journal, the New York Sun, the Ogdensburg Journal, the Troy Daily Times, all con- tain extended editorials commendatory of Mr. Harris' able and successful efforts in behalf of the new capitol. The latter paper, in speaking of the structure, says : "The father of this structure, which is to rank foremost among the majestic buildings of the world, is Hamilton Harris. Al- bany owes a debt of gratitude to Senator Harris

for his advocacy of the stupendons enterprise and for his labors in carrying it on, which it can never repay." He studied hard to devise means to have the new building completed as soon as possible, without having the burden of taxation fall upon posterity. His bills relating to the matter were framed with great fairness, practicability and good sense, and the citizens of the State of New York will always appland his earnestness, zeal and perse- verance in the great cause in which he was en- listed.

In the autumn of 1875 he was elected to the Senate of the State from his district. On taking his seat in that body he entered into its deliberations and its proceedings with a facility that indicated natural legislative abilities.

As chairman of the Finance Committee, of the Committee on Joint Library, and of the select Committee on Apportionment, his labors were use- ful and exhaustive.

On the floor of the Senate he always took a prominent part in the discussion of leading public questions ; his arguments never failed to command respect and attention.

At the expiration of his Senatorial term he was, in 1877, re-elected by a large majority. Having served his second term in a manner which brought to him high Senatorial honors, he decided to abandon public life and devote himself exclusively to the ex- tended duties of his profession. From this resolu- tion he has deviated but in one instance. In the fall of 1884 he ran as one of the Republican Elec- tors on the State ticket. In October, 1879, his name was prominently brought forward for re- election to the Senate, and under circumstances so flattering that few could have resisted the nomina- tion. But Mr. Harris, adhering to his resolution, on October 3, 1879, in a brief note published in the Evening Journal, most respectfully, but peremp- torily, declined to accept the nomination under any circumstances.

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.

Bi-centennial history of Albany. History of the county of Albany, N. Y., from 1609 to 1886. With portraits, biographies and illustrations, Part 42

Author: Howell, George Rogers, 1833-1899; Tenney, Jonathan, 1817-1888 Publication date: 1886 Publisher: New York, W. W. Munsell & Co. Number of Pages: 1452

Author: Howell, George Rogers, 1833-1899; Tenney, Jonathan, 1817-1888
Publication date: 1886
Publisher: New York, W. W. Munsell & Co.
Number of Pages: 1452