USA > New York > Kings County > Brooklyn > Civil, political, professional and ecclesiastical history, and commercial and industrial record of the County of Kings and the City of Brooklyn, N. Y. > Part 148
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 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101 | Part 102 | Part 103 | Part 104 | Part 105 | Part 106 | Part 107 | Part 108 | Part 109 | Part 110 | Part 111 | Part 112 | Part 113 | Part 114 | Part 115 | Part 116 | Part 117 | Part 118 | Part 119 | Part 120 | Part 121 | Part 122 | Part 123 | Part 124 | Part 125 | Part 126 | Part 127 | Part 128 | Part 129 | Part 130 | Part 131 | Part 132 | Part 133 | Part 134 | Part 135 | Part 136 | Part 137 | Part 138 | Part 139 | Part 140 | Part 141 | Part 142 | Part 143 | Part 144 | Part 145 | Part 146 | Part 147 | Part 148 | Part 149 | Part 150 | Part 151 | Part 152 | Part 153 | Part 154 | Part 155 | Part 156 | Part 157 | Part 158 | Part 159 | Part 160 | Part 161 | Part 162 | Part 163 | Part 164 | Part 165 | Part 166 | Part 167 | Part 168 | Part 169 | Part 170 | Part 171 | Part 172 | Part 173 | Part 174 | Part 175 | Part 176 | Part 177 | Part 178 | Part 179 | Part 180 | Part 181 | Part 182 | Part 183 | Part 184 | Part 185 | Part 186 | Part 187 | Part 188 | Part 189
The judge refers to another case, Early v. Smith, cited from the Appendix to 12th Irish Com. Law R. This was an action for slander, where the Court said: "We do not compel the plaintiff to state the specific times at which she charges the words to have been spoken, and binding by them, or the names of the parties to whom the words were spoken, but the occasions on which the words were spoken. But the Court refused to bind the plaintiff to specific times. There is a vast difference," continues the judge, "between the nature of that action and this. It was the essence of slander that the words had been spoken in the presence and hearing of other people, and the plaintiff might well be presumed to have the means easily accessible of fixing the occasion and, with some certainty, the time of the wrong. No such presumption naturally arises here; indeed, the contrary to some extent appears."
After referring to certain confessions made by a person promi- nent in the trial, the judge says: "I we should make the order for a bill of particulars now asked for, the defendant might, in the first place, with great plausibility object to all
1236
HISTORY OF KINGS COUNTY.
proof which does not point to some specific time, and, in the next, demand a verdict of nequittal, even if the jury should believe the evidence against him, because he had not been shown to have committed the offense at the particular times to which the plaintiff had been confined by the order and the bill of particulars. If this result would not follow upon such a state of faets, I see no object in asking for the order; and if such results should follow, it seems to me it would be a re- proach upon the administration of justice. I think the parties can have a perfectly fair trial of the issues in the ordinary way. I am therefore in favor of affirming the order denying the bill of particulars made at Special Term, but without costs."
Thereby Judge Neilson's order denying a bill of particulars was affirmed. On the appeal taken from this decision to the Court of Appeals, the opinien of Neilson and Reynolds was reversed. Immediately on the announcement of this decision in the Court of Appeals, the indefatigable counsel for Mr. Beecher made a second application for a bill of particulars before Judge McCne, who granted the order at the Special Term, from which there was an appeal to the General Term of the City Court, which was argned before Judges Neilson and Reynolds. After argument, Judges Neilson and Reynolds delivered opinions reversing the decision made by Judge MIcCue; the opinion of Judge Neilson is somewhat lengthy, that of Reynolds brief, pointed and learned. He tersely reiterates the grounds he took in the opinion to which we have alluded. We might allude to many other important cases in which Judge Reynolds has ren- dered opinions, with interest and advantage to this work, but space will not permit.
As a lawyer he was successful; the result of his extensive legal knowledge was always at his command; making no preten- sions to show and brilliancy, he relies more on the strength and soundness of his positions and arguments than on attempts at rapid originality and sparkling reasens. If these qualities are useful in a lawyer they are inestimable in a judge.
Suffice it to say, his career thus far has been highly honor- able to himself and valuable to the prefession and the public.
NATHANIEL H. CLEMENT.
JUDGE CLEMENT was born at Tilton, N. H., in March, 1844. He graduated at Portsmouth High School in 1859, and the same year entered Dartmouth College, from whence he was graduated, and entered upon the study of law. He was admitted to the Bar in 1866, and immediately became a resident of Brooklyn, where he perfected an arrangement with the law firm of Crooke, Bergen & Pratt, by which he became its managing clerk. He oceupied this position till January 1st, 1870, when Pratt was elected a Justice of the Supreme Court, and of course dissolved his con- nection with the firm. Mr. Clement became a member of a new firm, under the name of Crooke, Bergen & Clement. In 1873 General Crooke was elected to Congress, and the firm was dis- solved. Mr. Clement immediately opened an office and began practice for himself. He hnd then been at the Bar seven years, during which time he had had large experience in almost every variety of practice which his association with his distinguished partners brought him. So that he commenced business for him - self under the most advantageous circumstances, and he entered at once on a lucrative practice, taking a high professional, po- litical and social position.
He gave the Democratic party his allegiance, and became a member of the Young Men's Democratie Club; a member of the Brooklyn ('lub, the Carlton ('lub, und Treasurer of the Brooklyn Dispensary. In the meantime ho was counsel in several import- ant cases, tho trials of which he conducted with distinguished Allecess. Among the cases in which ho was cannsel, was that of the Property-mener v. The East River Bridge and Coney Island Transit Company, oldaining a decision of the General Term of the Supreme Court holding that no railroad can be constructed
on the streets of Brooklyn or any other city without due com- pensation to the owners of the property through which it passes.
In the summer of 1882, Hon. Joseph Neilson retired from the Bench of the City Court, and it became necessary at the en- suing fall election to elect a judge in his place. Although Mr. Clement was then but thirty-eight years of age, his accomplish- ments as a lawyer and his high position as a citizen placed him prominently before the publie as the successor of Chief Justice Neilson. In the autumn of that year he received the nomination, which he accepted, and he was elected in the fol- lowing November. He began his judicial duties on the first of January, 1883. Of course, he has his judicial reputation to make, but he has now occupied the Bench considerably over a year; judging from the very able manner in which he has discharged his duties during this time, his future judicial career will com- pare favorably with that of his distinguished associates and predecessors on the Bench. It was once said by Chief Justice Bronson that experience was more beneficial to a judge than to any other public official; and the remark was true. And yet there are men who possess natural judicial minds and methods, and who come to the labors and responsibilities of the Bench with intuitive ease. From the high estcem in which Judge Clement is held by the Bar and the publie, we risk nothing in saying that he belongs to this class. He has now twelve years of judicial service before him; how much each passing year will add to his judicial usefulness and accomplishments, remains to be seen.
SAMUEL D. MORRIS .*
SAMUEL D. MORRIS was born in Monmouth County, New Jer- sey. His father, Robert P. Morris, was a farmer, actively en- gaged in the pursuit of agriculture at the time of his son's birth. The early years of young Morris were spent upon his father's farm in tilling the soil. Not richly endowed with wealth, the father and his sons were compelled to work winter and summer, early and late. Henee it was that young Samuel was unable to receive instruction in anything but the cultivation of the ground. However, arriving at the age of twenty-one, he acted upon a re- solve long previously formed. He entered upon a regular course of schooling, at Leedsville, in his native State, with the saine intense energy which has marked his subsequent career. After a few months spent at this place, he connected himself with the academy at Homdel, where he remained for six months, when the principal of the institution removing to Johnstown, N. Y., Morris followed him, and remnined under his charge until thoroughly prepared for a collegiate course. Selecting Rutgers College as the institution at which to complete his educa- tion, he was admitted to the sophomore class. Having finished his course of studies, he went to the Law School at Ballston Spa, then in high repute as a training school for young lawyers, and under the able charge of Prof. J. W. Fowler. This was in 1810. His prominence in the debates, which were a feature of the training at this school, gave him the highest prize within the gift of the school. Among his associates at Rutgers and the Ballston school, were Judge Bedle, now Governor of New Jersey, and Judge Larremore, of New York. A year later, July 3, 1850, Mr. Morris was admitted to the practice of the law at Plattsburg, N. Y .; and in the spring of 1851, he came to Brooklyn to enter upon hls profession.
About the time of his settling in Brooklyn, Pierce had been nominated for the Presidency, and our young lawyer, an ardent Democrat, entered most enthusiastically into the campaign. Upon the hustings nightly, in that vigorous canvass, his voice was heard urging the principles of the Democratic doctrine.
* The author is Indebled to a friend of Judge Morris for this admirable biographical sketch.
I Moveis,
1237
BENCH AND BAR OF BROOKLYN.
His abilities and rare qualities as a speaker were thus made known to his fellow-citizens. His speeches, and the pronounced quality of his political doctrines, brought him into favorable notice.
In the following fall of 1853, he received the Democratic nomination for Assembly, and, in the face of a strong and bitter opposition, was elected by an overwhelming majority. Three members then represented the interests of Kings County in the State Assembly. The session in which he took part was exciting. Horatio Seymour was Governor. The " Maine Law" excitement was at its height, and the temperance interests were active and aggressive. In the discussions which ensued, Mr. Morris took an active part, and was appointed to the committee to whichi was referred the bill which had been introduced favoring the prohibitory law. That committee consisted of nine members, eight of whom reported in favor of the passage of the bill. Mr. Morris, however, offered a minority report to the contrary. The bill, however, was passed; but Governor Seymour promptly re- turned it with his veto, and in his message followed very closely the line of argument employed by Mr. Morris in his minority report.
After the adjournment of the Legislature, Mr. Morris was ap- pointed Corporation Attorney to the city of Brooklyn. In the spring of 1855, tho Legislature having re-passed the Maine Law Bill, which was promptly signed by Governor Myron H. Clark, who had been elected as a temperance candidate, Mr. Morris was called upon, in the dischargo of his duties, to enforce it. Believing it to be an unjust and despotic law, and that he could not remain in office and properly perform its duties without en- forcing it, he resigned his office in May, 1855. He now set about the work of testing the constitutionality of the law, and he carried the celebrated " Toynbee Case "* to the Court of Appeals, which eminent and learned body declared the law to be uncon- stitutional. Thus was Mr. Morris' course and judgment, both in the Legislature and the office of Attorney, vindicated.
The great personal triumph of this opinion lifted him higher than ever in public esteem, and in the fall of 1855 he was elected Judge of the County Court, and upon this bench he sat for the full term of four years. It was within his power to have ac- cepted a renomination, but he declined it, and became a candi- date for the District Attorneyship, a position much more to the liking of his active and energetic disposition. His failure to re- ceive the nomination his friends attributed to political trickery, and he ran upon an independent ticket. Disaster overtook the Democratic party in this campaign, and John Winslow, a Re- publican, was elected. At the expiration of the term of Mr. Winslow, during which Mr. Morris had sedulously devoted himself to a large and growing practice, our subject was elected District Attorney. This was in 1862; he was re-elected in 1865, and again in 1868, having served in this most important office three terms, or nine years.
The fact that Judge Morris was elected three times is sufficient to show the confidence reposed in him by the voters of Brooklyn, and we might, with justice, point to that fact alone as a record of honor. But Judge Morris' course as District Attorney was marked by the greatest energy, the most rigid enforcement of the laws, and the most relentless pursuit of criminals.
Before his assumption of the duties of the office, the "Diamond Murder" had occurred. Sigismund Fellner, who had come to this country in 1861, because of domestic difficulties at home in Germany, brought with him a large amount of diamonds. Arriving in New York, he made the acquaintance of a country- man named Ratzky. A strong intimacy growing up between them, they came to Brooklyn to reside together. Not long after this, the body of Fellner was found floating off the New Jersey shore near Keyport. Ratzky was at once arrested upon sus- picion, but had not been brought to trial when Judge Morris
became District Attorney. The new incumbent at onco took up this work. A month was spent in the preparation of tlio case. The difficulty of this task will be appreciated when it is known that two years had elapsed sinco the commission of the crime, and much of the evidence had been scattered. Edwin James, the distinguished English advocate, had then but lately come to this country, and was in the full bloom of his deserved reputa- tion as an able lawyer; he, with the late ex-Judge Stuart, were engaged for tho defense. But notwithstanding their brilliant efforts for their client, so complete was tho chain of evidence produced by the prosecution, that Ratzky was convicted of murder in the first degree. So searching had been the examina- tion into the case, so complete and minute, that even tho clothes of Fellner were found after an expiration of two years, and brought into court.
In the case of Yates, who had been arrested for tho murder of Curran, the policeman, this quality of sleuth-hound persistency and tireless energy was even moro manifest. This case was taken to the Court of Appeals, where a new trial was ordered. Upon the second trial, Yates was convicted of murder in the second degree.
Probably no case in which Judge Morris acted as prosecutor, up to the time of the Tilton-Beecher caso, ever excited greater attention than the " Otero Murder Case." And this because of the mystery which at first surrounded the deed. Otero was a wealthy Cuban, who had come to this country upon business. During his stay in New York, he was enticed by two Spaniards, Gonzales and Salvador, whose acquaintance he had made, to Brooklyn, and was murdered by them in the City Park. The two men were convicted. The General Term of the Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Court of Oyer and Terminer, but Judge Morris, carrying the case to the Court of Appeals, obtained a reversal of the decision of the Supreme Court, and the murderers were executed. (See "Important Trials.")
Of other cases which will be well remembered, was the Skid- more Murder, or "Air-Gun Murder," as it was better known. Skidmore, pending the trial, cheated the gallows by committing suicide in his cell.
On the 31st day of December, 1872, Mr. Morris yielded up the District Attorneyship, which he had held for nearly nine years, and has since devoted himself exclusively to his large practice, both criminal and civil. Among the more recent cases in which Judge Morris has won much credit may be mentioned the defense of Fanny Hyde, and the prosecution of a largo number of the claims of those who suffered from the disaster to the Staten Island ferry-boat Westfield.
There is something remarkable in his fidelity to his clients; no circumstance that tends to their advantage is ever over- looked, and he perfectly understands when and how to seize the vantage ground of the contest. Few lawyers go to tho bar with their cases better prepared for trial than Judge Morris; and he seldom speaks in court without being listened to with profound attention. Some of his arguments and addresses to courts and juries which have been published, will always be read by the legal student and by lay readers with pleasure and profit.
Socially, Judge Morris is one who surrounds himself with friends. Somewhat reserved and reticent in his intercourse with strangers, his friendships aro of slow growth, but when grown, strong, healthy and wholesome, lasting with life, and not over- thrown by every summer breeze that blows from the west. His friendship once gained, his confidence once won, and there is revealed a warm heart, beating with generous impulses, and a spirit accommodating, agreeable, and sacrificing.
Twice married, he has made for himself a happy home, and it is at his own fireside, perhaps, after all, that he is seen at the best advantage. The further fame and reputation he has won by his participation in the great Tilton- Leecher case will be best determined when the passions and prejudices it has engendered have had time to cool.
.
* See The People v. Toynbee (20 Barb., 168 ; S. C. 13 N. Y., 378).
123S
HISTORY OF KINGS COUNTY.
JOHN C. PERRY.
No circumstance in the history of the Bench and Bar ef Broek- lyn, or of Kings County, is fraught with more mournful interest than the sudden termination of the life of this eminent and widely esteemed lawyer.
He came to Brooklyn in 1854, a young and ardent lawyer, and entered upon the duties of his professien, having theroughly studied the principles of law in the writings and produetiens of the great masters of jurisprudence with a streng, though quiet, determination te succeed in his professien. Witheut display, with unpretending ability, and undoubted legal accomplish- ments, he succeeded to an extent that would be gratifying to many more ambitious men. One of his streng endowments was his intuitive faculty of making friends, and of inspiring all who knew him with the highest confidence in his integrity and hener.
It would, however, be the work of supererogatien for us to enter upon any extended eulegy ef Mr. Perry, after the beautiful tribute ef respect paid te his memory by the Brooklyn Bench and Bar soon after his death.
Jolin C. Perry was born at Ferrestburg, Sullivan County, New York, on April 21, 1832. Having passed through an ele- mentary eeurse at the common schoel, he entered Menticello Academy, where he acquired an excellent practical education, and while very young he entered on the study of the legal pro- fession. Ile pursued his studies with such industry and success that he was admitted to the Bar of the Supreme Court of the State as seen as lie attained the age of 21 years, as by the Cen- stitution he eeuld not have been admitted before that time. After practicing three years, he was appointed Assistant District Attorney of Ulster County, having removed to that county from Sullivan County after his admission.
In the autumn of 1857 he remeved to Broeklyn, and began the practice of his professien in the city of New York; but, like many other lawyers whose residence is in Brooklyn, he practiced in both eities.
Mr. Perry soon took a prominent position at both Bars, and in the city of Brooklyn he secured the confidence and esteem of his fellow-citizens in a marked degree. Whatever tended to the interests of Brooklyn he always warmly adveeated.
Hle early became a political partisan and a member of the Republican party, conscientiously and firmly upholding or innintaining the principles of his party ; he felt it to be as much a man's duty to take an interest in politics as was the advancement of his own individual affairs ; that the good order and welfare of society is subserved by the interest which respectable and responsible men take in politics. Thus Mr. Perry came to a position so prominent in the Republican party in Kings County that, in the autumn of 1863, he was nominated and elected member of Assembly by his party, taking his seat in the Legislature Jannary 5, 1864. In the fall of that year he was returned to tho Legislature, serving in that body from January 3rd to April 28th, 1865. The late Gen. Philip S. Crooke was one of his colleagues in his first legislativo ses- sion.
In the spring of 1865, Mr. Perry was appointed Assistant United States District Attorney for the Eastern Distriet of New York by Hon. Benjamin D. Silliman, a name conspicuous in the history of the State, who was at that time United States District Attorney for the Eastern District. This was an ex- ceelingly high compliment to Mr. Perry as a man and as a Inwyer. The manner in which he discharged the duties of his office greatly enelinneed his professional reputation.
Mr. Silliman resigned the office in the fall of 1866, and was sneceeded by Hon. Benjamin F. Traey. Although it was the wish of Judge Tracy that Mr. Perry should continue as his nawistant, sneh were his professional duties that he deelined.
In 1871 Mr. Perry was elected Stato Senator in tho Second
District; his Democratic opponent was James F. Pieree, whe entered the canvass backed by a Democratic majority ef over one thousand. Nothing in the life of Mr. Perry so theroughly illustrates his popularity as a man, and the streng held he had upon the confidence and esteem ef the people, than the result ef this election: he was elected-to use the expression of politicians, he ran mere than one thousand vetes ahead of his ticket. At the clese of his Senatorial term, he declined a tendered re- nomination, determined to devote himself entirely to the duties of his profession. In 1880 he was appointed Counsel te the Breeklyn Police and Excise Department, a pesitien which he held until he resigned it, a short time previous to his death.
About the last of March, 1884, he was tendered, by President Arthur, the position of Chief Justice of Wyoming Territory, en the recommendation of nearly all the judges and ex-judges ef his district. He accepted it, and there are very few whe weull not; and at the time of his death, which occurred en the 14th of April, had completed his arrangements fer his departure to enter upon the duties of his office. One of the pleasant incidents connected with his anticipated departure was a reception ten- dered him by the Brooklyn Club. Many other agreeable cir- cumstances exhibited the anxiety of his numerous friends to testify of their esteem fer him, and give him a heartfelt farewell. "The congratulations shewered upon him," said the Brooklyn Eagle, "had the value of perfect sineerity. A life of hard labor lay behind him; befere him, according to all human foresight, were henor, distinction, comparative ease and comfort. He, with his family, were leeking forward to the enjoyment of his reward; was engaged in preparation for his journey to the scenes of his new activities. The very day before his departure, apparently in full and vigorous health, while on the street with his daughter making his final arrangements, he suddenly and with- out any warning fell senseless, and, without speaking a farewell word to his family, a few hours after died. An hour had werked an awful change in his household, and all his friends were benumbed with the suddenness of the streke."
The sudden death ef one so eenspicuons in Brooklyn, under such circumstances, produced a prefeund sensation, which was attested by many publie and private demenstratiens; the most prominent of which was a large meeting of the Brooklyn Bench and Bar, whiel convened on the 16th of April, to give expres- sien to the high esteem in which they held his memory, of their past appreciation ef his character, and of their sorrew for his death. We have already referred to this meeting; it was one of unusual interest and solemnity, attended by the ablest members of the Brooklyn Bench and Bar. The following is a description of the proceedings of the meeting, which we give as an incident worthy to enter the legal history of Kings County and ef Brook- lyn:
Members of the Bench and Bar met in the General Term room of the Supreme Court, to take action on the death of the Hon. John C. Perry, Chief Justice of Wyoming Ter- ritory. In attendance were Justices Pratt, Cullen and Bartlett, of the Supreme Court; Chief Judge McCue, and Judges Rey nolds and Clement, of the City Court; Judge Moore, of the County Court; Surrogate Bergen, ex-Chief Judge Neilson, ex- Justice Gilbert ex-Judge Tracy, ex-Judge Morris, ex-Julgo Troy, ex-Judge Towns, ex-Judge Dailey, Corporation Counsel Taylor, ex-Judge Jesse C. Smith, ex-Judge Lynch, llen. W. C. De Witt, Hon. Theodore F. Jackson, Hon. Isaac S. Catlin, ex-Judge Livingston, Hon. John Winslow, District Attorney Ridgway and Assistant Distriet Attorneys Shorter and Jenks, Charles J. Patterson, F. E. Dana, William B. Davenport, Robert Johnstone, Henderson Benediet, Charles Ridgway, II. B. Hubbard, Henry A. Heirs, James Glendenning, Joseph M. Green- wood, F. L. Backus, J. J. Rogers, A. E. Lamb, A. Simi . W. E. S. Fales, A. H. Gelting, A. P. Hermann, W. L. Whiting, George W. Mead, Hugo Hirsch, J. J. Leary, Edgar Bergen,
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.