USA > New York > Oneida County > History of Oneida County, New York : from 1700 to the present time, Volume I > Part 29
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
ROSCOE CONKLING. Although it is as lawyers only, that this chapter treats its subjects, yet, with some trepidation, it presents for consideration, one. of the most interesting characters that has ever appeared in this county. On October 30, 1829, at Albany, New York, Roscoe Conkling was born. His father was Alfred Conkling, a man of acquirements, a lawyer of eminence, and, at one time judge of the United States district court for the northern district of New York. His mother was Eliza Cockburn. When thirteen years of age the young man was placed in the Washington Collegiate Institute in New York, and re- mained there for one year. He attended the academy at Auburn, New York, for three years, beginning in 1843, to which city his father had removed from Albany. Impatient of study in the schools and not electing a college course, but rather desiring to be in active life, he commenced his law studies in the office of Spencer & Kernan in Utica in 1846, and was admitted to the bar in 1850, about six months before he became twenty-one years of age. He was exceedingly fortunate in being on friendly terms with the influential men in his political party, and on April 22, 1850, was appointed district attorney of this county. It is probable that he was the youngest man who ever held that office in the state of New York. The duties of this office are such that he obtained at once a varied experience. He was immediately called upon to try important criminal cases, and from the first he showed the metal in his com- position. Under the firm name of Walker & Conkling he practiced law for several years. In 1858 he was married to Julia, daughter of Henry Seymour, and sister of ex-governor and John F. Seymour of Utica. During that year he was elected mayor of Utica, and in the fall was nominated by the Republican party for the office of representative in Congress. This was brought about by a political conference held at the residence of General R. U. Sherman, in the house that stood upon the corner of Eagle and Kemble streets. (Several years since the house was removed from the lot and the lot has remained vacant since.) The conference was called to agree upon a candidate for representative
ROSCOE CONKLING United States Senator
241
HISTORY OF ONEIDA COUNTY
in Congress in opposition to Orsamus B. Matteson, who had served for several years in Congress, and was the political leader, and for years had held undis- puted sway in the county, but by reason of serious complications in his official life had provoked intense feeling and opposition. There were present at the conference Mr. Conkling, Ward Hunt, Richard U. Sherman, Joseph A. Shear- man, Palmer V. Kellogg, William Ferry, A. D. Barber, and some others. After considerable controversy Mr. Conkling was selected as the candidate to oppose the Matteson element in the party. Charles H. Doolittle was the opposing can- didate, and a bitter fight for the nomination followed. Mr. Conkling was nom- inated in the convention, and elected over P. Sheldon Root, the Democratic can- didate. Before the termination of his term of office the question of war between the states filled the minds of the people, and, in the exciting election of 1860, which made Abraham Lincoln president of the United States, Mr. Conkling was re-elected to Congress by an increased majority. In 1862 he was defeated by Francis Kernan, and in 1864 he defeated Mr. Kernan for the same office. Di- vision in the Republican party in 1866 threatened to defeat him, but within a few days before election the tide turned in his favor. Palmer V. Kellogg, who had been one of his staunchest supporters, had been nominated by a body of men calling themselves Independent Republicans, and he was adopted as the candidate of the Democratic party. Mr. Conkling, however, received a hand- some majority after one of the most remarkable campaigns ever experienced in the county. It has been said many times by the friends of Mr. Conkling, that the most effective speech of his life was delivered during this campaign in Old Concert Hall, which stood upon the lot now occupied by the post-office. This was a meeting of the workingmen's party, a vast majority of whom, up to that time, were supporting Mr. Kellogg. Mr. Conkling's address at this meeting was so convincing that he changed the sentiment of the audience, which was adverse to him in the beginning, to an overwhelming sentiment in his favor. In the winter of 1867 he was elected to the United States senate, and re-elected in 1873 and 1879. Soon after his election to the senate in 1873, he was tendered by President Grant the nomination of chief justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Still later in 1882, he was appointed by President Arthur and confirmed by the senate to the position of associate justice of the Supreme Court, but he declined both offices.
It seems almost incredible that a lawyer who filled such important positions as Mr. Conkling had, and who had never slighted the duties demanded, should have any time to devote to the practice of his profession. With ordinary men such would have been the case, but Mr. Conkling is not to be classed with or- dinary men. In his case, as in that of all others who have attained in the world, the story was ever the same, work, work, work. It would be a safe estimate to make that out of the twenty-four hours of the day, he worked eighteen. Up to the time of his election to the United States senate he made it a practice to at- tend every circuit court held in the county, and he was invariably retained in every important trial. His adversary was almost invariably Francis Kernan. The reason for this is apparent. The plaintiff on bringing an important suit, naturally retained one of the ablest attorneys in the county, and this forced the defendant to retain the other. When such a case was on trial the court house Vol. I-16
242
HISTORY OF ONEIDA COUNTY
was invariably crowded with spectators, not because of the interest in the case, but in the counsel at the bar. It was an event never to be forgotten by a lawyer, to attend court presided over by Foster or Doolittle, and hear Conkling and Kernan conduct a trial. The practice of Mr. Conkling was largely confined to the trial of civil actions, although occasionally he defended a criminal charged with some high crime, and in a very few instances he assisted district attorneys in prosecuting a criminal who was charged with a serious offense. He argued few cases on appeal. The Court of Appeals reports show that he never appeared in that court more than four or five times, and the same is true as to the gen- eral term of the Supreme Court. He occasionally, but not frequently, appeared in trials in the United States circuit court, and on some occasions he argued cases in the Supreme Court of the United States.
After the dissolution of the firm of Walker & Conkling, Mr. Conkling was as- sociated with Montgomery Throop. This firm existed from 1855 to 1862. After- wards he formed a partnership under the name of Conkling, Holmes & Coxe. and on its dissolution the firm of Conkling, Lord & Coxe was formed; Scott, Lord and Honorable Alfred C. Coxe being the partners. After Mr. Conkling re- tired from the senate, and in November, 1881, he opened a law office in the city of New York. Among those who sought his services almost immediately were Jay Gould, Thomas A. Edison and C. P. Huntington. The cases in which he was retained were of great interest and involved unusual and difficult questions of law. There were invariably arrayed against him in these litigations some of the leaders of the New York bar, and seldom, if ever, was he over-matched. Among other cases of importance which he argued in the Supreme Court of the United States were The County of San Mateo vs. The Southern Pacific Railroad Company, Cook County National Bank vs. The United States, and Marie vs. Garrison. After his death there were many expressions of opinion in regard to Mr. Conkling as a lawyer, by prominent judges and lawyers who had known him during his career in New York city. Perhaps Judge Shipman, of the United States circuit court, has given the truest estimate of his standing in the metropolis. He said: "I thought him a great and profound lawyer, and that he would have been in the front rank of his profession at any time or place. He did not have the accurate learning of Judge B. R. Curtis, or the great wealth of legal knowledge of Mr. O'Connor, but I was exceedingly surprised to see how much he had retained after his long congressional career. His affluence of language and of illustration was great; but he had a wonderful power of state- ment, and he was an inventor in the art of decorating his statement so as to make it attractive."
Mr. Conkling was, however, essentially an advocate. When at times he took part in important trials on the same side with Mr. Kernan, Mr. Doolittle, or with any other eminent counsel, in every instance he made the argument to the jury. This clearly shows that all associated counsel recognized him as their superior in that particular branch of the practice. Early in life Mr. Conkling com- menced making the most thorough preparation for the trial in every case. It was his custom to take very full notes of the evidence on the trial. In this he was very proficient, as he wrote a very excellent hand, and very rapidly. As nearly all the trials in which he took part required several days, and some-
243
HISTORY OF ONEIDA COUNTY
times weeks, he occupied his time at night in preparing to sum up the case. He wrote out from time to time during the trial portions of his argument. This enabled him to be ready at the close of the evidence to present the case to the jury from his written argument, which he held in his hand much of the time while speaking. He once said that he would rather stand up before a jury and look the twelve men in the eye, than to do any other thing in the world. Many times during the trial of a case he would startle those upon his own side by the audacious way in which he would conduct the trial. This might occur in re- gard to the examination of a witness or in his method of presenting the case to the jury. Many trials, civil and criminal, might be mentioned to show Mr. Conkling's peculiar ability and tact before a jury. Perhaps in no case ever tried by him was this shown to better advantage than in Northrup against Richardson. The action had been brought on the following facts: A woman, riding in a carriage, was approaching Utica from Marcy. On reaching the bridge over the Mohawk river the carriage was struck by a milk wagon, over- turned, and the woman precipitated down an embankment. She claimed to be seriously injured. The milk wagon was owned by a farmer and was driven by his son. The woman lay upon a bed for two years after the accident. Her hus- band finally brought suit against the father of the boy for damages. The trial was had in Utica; Mr. Kernan and Mr. Spriggs for the plaintiff, and Mr. Conk- ling for the defendant, and it lasted about two weeks. The woman was brought into court upon a bed, and for two days gave her testimony. The scene was pathetic in the extreme. Mr. Conkling treated her with great kindness, but cross examined her carefully. When the evidence was closed the sentiment of the court, of the audience, and undoubtedly of the jury was very strong in the woman's favor. He took the startling ground that the woman was absolutely well; that she could leave the bed and walk out of the court house; that she was honest in the belief that she could not walk, but that she was mistaken. Against the strong argument made by Mr. Kernan on the other side, and a charge fa- vorable to the woman by Judge Bacon, the jury rendered a verdict in Mr. Conk- ling's favor. Now comes the sequel. Angered by the fact that she had lost the case, the woman arose from her bed that very day and walked the streets of Utica. Could even modern Christian Science have wrought a more complete cure ?
Mr. Conkling's method in presenting a case to a jury and also in arguing questions of law to the court, has been inordinately praised and severely criti- cised. Both his admirers and critics have at times been right. His speeches were always very elaborate, very ornate, and contained all manner of figures of speech. Some very good, and some very defective. Take for instance these : In the case of The People of the State of New York vs. Dennison, argued be- fore the Court of Appeals, he characterized the case as "a halcyon and vociferous proceeding." It might be asked what that phrase means? In summing up the case of Smith vs. The New York Central Railroad, referring to a prominent wit- ness and official of the road, who wore a diamond pin on his shirt front, he said, "The time will come, gentlemen of the jury, when the diamonds which sparkle on Major Priest's bosom will buy less salvation than the merest pebble at the bottom of the spring of the poorest beggar." In another instance he referred
244
HISTORY OF ONEIDA COUNTY
to a witness who was addicted to drink, as follows: "His mouth spread over his face, a fountain of falsehood and a sepulchre for rum."
Although as an advocate, Mr. Conkling ranked among the foremost in the state, his success was not due so much to what he said, as the way he said it. The effect upon the jury was produced by him much in the same way as George Whitfield affected his audiences, of whom it was said that he could pronounce the word "Mesopatamia" so as to bring his audience to tears. Mr. Conkling's splendid physique, graceful manner, round, full, melodious voice, and the power of his personal magnetism, was almost resistless. He did not persuade the jury ; he overpowered them, and made his will theirs. Give him the last speech to a jury, and if the case was anywhere nearly balanced on the evidence he would win a verdict. Although he was always listened to with close attention by the appellate courts, he was not so effective here as at the trial. Had he devoted his entire life to the study and practice of law, he would have ranked as a lawyer among the foremost that the country has ever produced, but no man can be so great that he can gain the very front rank at the bar without devoting sub- stantially his lifetime to the profession. For a knowledge of law and the abil- ity to apply it to given facts, perhaps Hunt was his equal, and Foster and Ker- nan his superiors, yet, for all in all, had he an equal among us? What one of all the lawyers who has lived in the entire country during the last twenty-eight years, except Roscoe Conkling, would have refused a seat on the bench of the Supreme Court of the United States, or to be its Chief Justice ?
ALFRED C. COXE was born at Auburn, N. Y., in 1845. His father, Rev. Han- son Coxe, moved to Utica while his son was a boy. Young Coxe prepared for college at the Utica Free academy, entered Hamilton College with the class of 1868, but left during his junior year and commenced studying law with his uncle, United States Senator Roscoe Conkling; was admitted to the bar and commenced practice as a partner with his uncle. In 1882 he was appointed judge of the district court of the United States for the northern district of New York, and in 1903 he was promoted to circuit judge for the second circuit. On the creation of the United States court of customs he was appointed by Presi- dent Taft its first presiding judge, but he declined to accept the office. For several years past he has been a member of the Circuit Court of Appeals for the second circuit.
HIRAM DENIO was born in Rome, N. Y., May 21, 1799. His education was obtained at the Fairfield academy, Herkimer county, and he studied law with Judge Hathaway of Rome and Storrs & White of Whitesboro. He commenced practicing in Rome in 1821, was appointed district attorney in October, 1825, and served for nine years. In 1826 he removed to Utica. In 1834 he was ap- pointed circuit judge, and served for about four years. June 23, 1853, he was appointed to fill a vacancy in the Court of Appeals, and twice afterwards was elected to the same office, and served as one of the judges of that court until 1866. He died in Utica on the 17th day of October, 1868. Judge Denio ranked very high as a judge, and perhaps no one who ever sat in the court of last resort in the state served the public better than he. His opinions rank with the best that were ever written in any court in the entire country.
SAMUEL BEARDSLEY Chief Judge of Supreme Court of Judicatory
HIRAM DENIO Judge of the Court of Appeals
ALEXANDER S. JOHNSON Judge of the United States Circuit Court, Second Circuit
245
HISTORY OF ONEIDA COUNTY
CHARLES M. DENNISON was born in Floyd, April 3, 1822, and died at Whites- boro, November 5, 1900. He was the son of Samuel Dennison, and was educated at Whitestown seminary, Clinton Liberal institute, and at the Holland Patent academy. He studied law with Alanson Bennett at Rome, and was admitted to the bar in 1847. He practiced law alone in Rome until 1852, when he took as a partner George Harrison Lynch, and this partnership continued until 1870. At that time Mr. Dennison removed from Rome to Utica, where he resided for about one year and practiced law in Utica. He then took up his residence in Whitesboro. In Utica he formed a partnership with John H. Knox, and after- wards also took as a partner Charles J. Everett. This firm existed only for a short time, when Mr. Knox retired. The firm continued under the name of Dennison & Everett until 1881, when Mr. Everett retired, and Mr. Dennison took as his partner his son, George E. Dennison. In 1862 Mr. Dennison was appointed assistant assessor of internal revenue at Rome, and he held that posi- tion as long as the office existed. After Congress enacted the law for the super- vision of elections Mr. Dennison was appointed chief supervisor of election for the northern district of New York, and he held this position down to the time of his death. Mr. Dennison was a prominent candidate for judge of the United States district court, and had a strong backing, but the president appointed William J. Wallace of Syracuse instead of Mr. Dennison to that position. In 1874 Mr. Dennison was supported for the nomination of justice of the Supreme Court by many Republicans, but he did not secure the nomination. He married Cornelia Pond March 4, 1851. He was prominent at the bar during his entire career, although he rarely took part in the trial of cases. His time was given more to the settlement of estates, and he had also a large practice in bankruptcy under the act of 1867. His ability was such that had he devoted himself to the trial of cases he would have been eminently successful.
CHARLES H. DOOLITTLE was born in Herkimer, N. Y., February 19, 1816, pre- pared for college at Fairfield academy, and graduated from Amherst in 1836. He commenced his legal studies in Little Falls, but soon after came to Utica and studied with Denio & Hunt. He was admitted to the bar in 1839, and soon attained a position in the front rank at the bar. His acquirements were unusual, and his industry was almost unparalleled. No matter how trivial the case might be, he made the most thorough investigation and did everything possible to prepare his case for trial. He was very quick of perception, a pro- found lawyer, and a courteous gentleman. He was a member of the city council in 1839-44-45, and was mayor of Utica in 1853. In 1869 he was elected justice of the Supreme Court, and served until his death. He was one of the few men who have occupied a seat upon the bench of the Supreme Court in this state of whom it could be said he was really a great judge. Becoming absolutely worn out by overwork, he was advised by his physician to take a trip abroad. He sailed from New York in May, 1874, and was lost overboard. No account was ever given of his disappearance, whether by accident or otherwise. The date of his death is given as May 21, 1874.
HENRY A. FOSTER. One of the most prominent lawyers of Utica said recently that as "a clean cut lawyer" Henry A. Foster was the equal of any man any-
246
HISTORY OF ONEIDA COUNTY
where. This remarkable man was born at Hartford, Connecticut, May 7, 1800, and died at Rome on the 11th day of May, 1889.
His legal education was acquired in the office of David B. Johnson of Caze- novia, B. Davis Noxon of Onondaga Hill, Onondaga county, Beach & Popple of Oswego, and James Sherman of Rome. He commenced trying cases in the justice court before he was admitted to the bar; and it was then said of him that when Foster was in a case "it meant business." In 1822 he was admitted to the bar; and, he had acquired such a reputation for the trial of the cases in the justice court that on the same day he was admitted he was assigned to defend a criminal against the famous Samuel Beardsley, who was at that time district attorney. The case presented some new and intricate questions of law which Foster argued with marked ability and procured an acquittal. In 1826 Mr. Foster was nominated for member of assembly, but failed of election. The next year, when he was only twenty-six years of age, he was appointed surrogate of the county, and held this office until 1831, when he relinquished it to become state senator, to which office he had been elected. He was during three years, beginning in 1826, trustee for the village of Rome, and supervisor of the town for five years. In August, 1835, he was again appointed surrogate, and resigned the position in 1837 to take his seat in the United States house of representatives. In 1840 he was again elected state senator. Before his term expired he resigned to accept the appointment of United States senator. His failure of re-election to the United States senate, and the disappointments attending it, gave color to all his after life. From that time forth he was irascible and impatient. These characteristics frequently worked to his disadvantage. President Pierce ap- pointed him in 1853 United States district attorney for the northern district of New York, but he declined the office. Until the agitation over the slavery question assumed such proportions as to threaten the nation's life, Mr. Foster had been a Democrat, but soon after the formation of the Republican party he became a Republican. In 1863 he was nominated by his party for the office of justice of the Supreme Court, and elected. On his election he removed from Rome to Oswego, and resided there until his term of office expired, when he returned to his former home at Rome, and there he lived and practiced his pro- fession until a short time before his death. It is questionable whether there was ever an abler justice of the Supreme Court in this state than Foster. His knowledge of law was so great, his memory so remarkable, his perception so quick that he seemed a very prodigy when upon the bench. As an illustration of his marvelous memory it is related by an eminent lawyer that he met Judge Foster, long after his term of office had expired, and spoke of a case that he had tried before him many years before. He found that the judge remembered it to the minutest detail, and he then said to him, "Judge Foster, I am astonished to know that you remember this case." The judge replied, "I remember every case that was ever tried before me."
At a court held by him in Utica an important case was tried by Roscoe Conkling on one side, Francis Kernan and J. Thomas Spriggs on the other. He had many difficult questions of law to decide on the spur of the moment, and he showed great ability in his rulings. The evidence was completed; the case was summed up by Mr. Conkling on one side, and Mr. Kernan on the other.
WARD HUNT Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States
HENRY A. FOSTER United States Senator
247
HISTORY OF ONEIDA COUNTY
Then the judge gave one of his masterly charges to the jury. Mr. Conkling, after hearing the charge, turned to a friend and said, "Judge Foster knows every- thing." It was not alone in the field of law that his unusual acquirements appeared. He had an unusual knowledge of science, literature, mathematics, philosophy, geography, almost everything. Not long before his death he ap- peared as counsel in an important case at a special term in this county. The judge who held the court and who has since died, after hearing Foster's argu- ment said, "He is the noblest Roman of them all." As a judge Foster was sometimes very impatient. This was always the case if a lawyer, addressing the court, failed to make his point clear, or if he wandered from the point at issue or repeated an argument. He could not tolerate a repetition. He con- sidered it a reflection on his own comprehension. He would say sharply to counsel, "You have said that once, sir." On one occasion, when an attorney appeared before him and asked for an unusual and improper order, he said to him, in the hearing of the entire bar at court, "It is evident, sir, that you are a very poor lawyer." On another occasion, it is reported that an attorney, who had made a motion and saw that he was to be beaten, interrupted the court when it was rendering its decision by saying, "If your honor please, the first of Barber is dead against you." To which the judge replied, "The first of Foster holds, sir, that you sit down." It will readily be seen that Foster's court was an unpleasant place for a poor lawyer. It was also no place for a case which had no merit. His quick perception would soon distinguish the true from the false, and his endeavor was to so shape the trial that the right would prevail. He was sometimes, for this reason, perhaps, justly criticised for undertaking to control the verdict of the jury. His ability, however, was so great, that if he chose he could charge a jury in such a way as to almost invariably procure the verdict that he desired. Judge Foster was utterly free from anything like pretense or assumption. He was always elegant and digni- fied in his bearing, but his impatience and irascibility made him dreaded as an adversary at the bar, and feared when upon the bench. Yet his high char- acter, great ability, and unusual acquirements placed him very near, if not at the very top of the legal ladder in this county.
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.