USA > New York > Kings County > Brooklyn > The civil, political, professional and ecclesiastical history, and commercial and industrial record of the county of Kings and the city of Brooklyn, N. Y., from 1683 to 1884 Volume I > Part 78
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
We have thus given a history of the Colonial Su- preme Court, because part of its procedure took place in the County of Kings, as in all other counties of the State. The judges of the court were appointed from the different parts of the colony of New York. We find among them no names from the County of Kings; we shall therefore omit the names of these judges as they were not judicial officers residing in Kings County.
Court of Common Pleas .- By an act of the Colo- nial Legislature, passed in 1691, a Court of Common Pleas was established in every county of the State, and this was an early tribunal in the history of Kings County. At first it was composed of onc judge, with three justices associated, but in 1702 it was ordered that the judge be assisted by two or more justices, in holding the court.
This court had cognizance of causes above £5. The first or presiding judge held a Court of General Scs- sions of the Peacc, for the trial of criminals; it was
held at the sittings of the Common Pleas. Its practice assimilated both to the English King's bench, and Com- mon Pleas at Westminster. Its errors were corrected in the first instance by writs of error. Appeals were allowed to the General Term of the Supreme Court, from any judgment where the amount involved ex- ceeded the amount of £20. The first judge and justices thereof were appointed, at first, by the Governor and Council of the Colony of New York, and afterwards by the Governor of the State. These courts were contin- ued, without any material change; except, after 1821, there were five judges in each county, of whom one was designated as "first judge." By the Constitution of 1846, the Courts of Common Plcas in all the counties were abolished, and a COUNTY COURT was instituted in its place. Little of the proceedings of the Court of Common Pleas of Kings County can be found recorded till after the appointment of Nicholas Covenhoven, which took place March 28th, 1785. The judges and other officers for Kings County will be found in another place.
County Courts .- The Constitution of 1846 and the present Constitution provides for the election in each of the counties of the State, except the city and county of New York, of one County Judge, who shall hold the County Court, and shall have such jurisdiction in cases arising in Justices Courts, and in special cases, as the Legislature may prescribe ; but shall have no original civil jurisdiction except in such special cases. The Legislature may confer upon him equity jurisdiction in special cases. In pursuance of these provisions the Legislature has given the County Judge jurisdic- tion in actions of debt, assumpsit and covenant, not exceeding $2,000 ; in cases of trespass and personal injury not to exceed $500, and in replevin suits $1,000. The Legislature has also conferred upon the County Court Equity jurisdiction for the foreclosure of mortgages, the sale of real estate of infants, partition of land, admeasurement of dower, satisfaction of judg- ment whenever $75 is due on an unsatisfied execution, and the care and custody of lunatics and habitual drunkards. The new Judiciary Article of the Cousti- tution continues the County Courts with the powers and jurisdictions they before possessed, subject to the action of the Legislature. They were also given ori- ginal jurisdiction in all cases where the defendant re- sides in the county, and in which the damages sliall not exceed $1,000. The Legislature may confer additional original appellate jurisdiction. The tenure of the County Judge in each county was extended from four to six years. The salary is fixed by the Board of Supervisors, respectively.
Court of Sessions .- The Constitution associates with the County Judge of each county two Justices of the Peace, to be designated by law, to hold Courts of Sessions, with such criminal jurisdiction as the Legisla- turc shall prescribe, and perform such other duties as may be required by law.
344
HISTORY OF KINGS COUNTY.
The County Judges who have been elected sinee the formation of the County Court in the County of Kings are : Wm. Roekwell, elected in June, 1847 ; Samuel E. Johnson, deelared by the Supreme Court eleeted in place of Roekwell ; Henry A. Moore, elected Nov., 1851; Sam- uel D. Morris, eleeted Nov., 1855 ; Samuel Garrison, elected Nov., 1859 ; James Troy, Nov., 1867 ; Henry A. Moore, Nov., 1871 ; by re-election continued in office down to the present time, Aug., 1883.
Several interesting cases were tried in the carly Courts of Kings county after the Revolution. For several years there was a somewhat bitter dispute known as the " Bruyn (or Brume) controversy," between those who had by purchase beeome owners of what was known as the Bruyn patent (which included the right of free fishing in certain waters bounding the town of Graves- end), and the town of Gravesend .*
In 1789 Albert Voorhees became the owner of said patent which, as he contended, restrained the inhabitants from fishing in said waters, exeept under certain limita- tions. The inhabitants of the town, however, insisted that the patent did not legally prevent them from freely fishing, and eontinued to take fish against the orders of Mr. Voorhees, the assignee of the Bruyn patent, who, relying upon the power contained in the patent to re- strain free fishing in the waters deseribed in it, brought an action in the Supreme Court against several of the prominent eitizens of the town who had, in derrogation of the patent, insisted upon fishing in the restrieted wa- ters. Of course it was an action of great importance, and, aeeording to some aneient documents still existing in the town of Gravesend, was entitled as follows:
SUPREME COURT.
Albert Voorhees vs. Albert Jerline, " Hendrick Wyckoff, Inhabitants of Gravesend.
Kings County, ss .:
Action for trespass for erecting fish huts, tread- ing down grass, &c., &c.
At that time Aaron Burr was in the midst of his splendid praetiee at the bar-one of the most distin- guished lawyers in the nation. To him the town of Gravesend applied for couneil as soon as the action eom- meneed. They propounded to him several questions touching their rights in regard to the matter in eontro- versy between themselves and Mr. Voorhees. In reply to these questions, answering other things, Col. Burr said : "I recommend to the people of Gravesend to eon- tinuc to fish as usual, and by no means to suffer any new eneroachment by Mr. Voorhees or any one claiming un- der him ; all open violenee, however, should be avoided ; but if Mr. Voorhecs attempts to engross more of the fishery than the town has usually allowed, he must not
be quietly permitted to do so, whatever may be the con- sequences."
Mr. Burr closes his reply with this characteristic ad- vice : " As the suits are near a eonelusion, and the rights and privileges of each party will then be defi- nitely determined, it will be more prudent in the mean- time to suffer some small inconvenience than to give occasion to more controversies by breaches of the peaee."
It is stated that the town was willing to eoncede to Mr. Voorhees a patentee's right to one thirty-ninth of the commonage to the said waters, but not the exis- tence of the right to inhibit them from freely using all other parts of the fisheries.
As the ease really tendered an issue between the town and Mr. Voorhees, a requisite panel of jurors was, under the statute in such cases made and provided, summoned from Queens County. The town of Flush- ing, Jamaica, New Town and Oyster Bay furnished the jurors. Aeeording to the praetiee of the Courts at that time, the jury were directed to view the premises and examine the patents. This was done on the 14th of September, 1789, seven of the jurors being present.
On the 15th of September the trial began at a term of the Supreme Court held at Flatbush. It was closely and ably contested, oeeupying three whole days, result- in a verdiet for the town. Col. Burr appeared for the defendants, in whose hands "the law was a whole ar- mory of weapons, in the use of which his daring was only equalled by his skill, his elose, terse logic, and varied legal learning."
The minutes used by Col. Burr in his summing up to the jury are still in the possession of a distinguished citizen of Gravesend, together with that great lawyer's receipt for his serviees as counsel in the case.
"The argument of Col. Burr," says the gentleman to whom we have referred, "is a elear and foreible pre- sentation of the rights of the town evidently satisfae- tory to the jury, as their verdict elearly indieates."
The following is a copy of the receipt, courteously furnished for this work by a prominent eitizen of Kings County, long its careful custodian. :
"Received, New York, 15th March, 1790, by the hand of Mr. Albert Terhune, Twenty pounds in full for my services in the suit brought by Albert Voorhees against sundry in- habitants of the town of Gravesend. Received at the same time, Fifteen pounds for advice given under a general re- tainer." AARON BURR.
Thirty pounds, says our informant, was paid to the hotel-keeper at Flatbush, for entertaining the people of Gravesend during the trial, and also the amount of Col. Burr's bill at the said hotel for board while eondueting the trial. It is proper to add that the plaintiff in the ease, Mr. Voorhees, not satisfied with the verdict of the jury, took an appeal to the General Term of the Su- preme Court, where, after long arguments, the verdiet was affirmed with costs.
*NOTE .- See History of Gravesend, page 158-9, and History of Coney Island, page 189-191, of this volume.
·
345
THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURT HELD IN KINGS COUNTY.
A still later case, which created much excitement at the time, was the following : In the year 1834, while some laborers were excavating a ditch at the side of a highway in New Utrecht, more than a wagon-load of Indian stone arrow-heads were discovered lying together, under circumstances that induced the belief that a large manufactory of these indispensable articles of Indian warfare once existed at this place ; they were of all sizes, from one to six inches in length, some perfect, others partly finished. There were also a number of blocks of the same kind of stone found, in the same rough state as when brought from the quarry. But, where was that quarry ? They had the appearance of ordinary flint and were nearly as hard. Not only ar- row-hcads, but axes, and other articles of domestic utility, were found made from these stones.
Out of this discovery grew a legal contest, more ex- citing than any event that had agitated that ancient town. The men who found the relics claimed them by the right of discovery, while the owner of the land on which they were found claimed them as a part of his domain, insisting that they were his property quite as fully as were the stones and the dirt which were exca- vated with them. "Suppose," said the owner of the land, " that a valuable iron mine had been discovered by the men, would they have any right to it?" John Smalley, Esq., and William B. Waldo, Esq., two very respectable lawyers of Brooklyn, appeared in the case as counsel for the respective parties, the former for the plaintiff, and the latter for the defendant. The case was finally decided in favor of the owner of the soil.
The First Circuit Court, and Court of Oyer and Terminer held in the county of Kings after the organization of the Government, of which any minutes can be found, held its sittings at Flatbush on June 6th, 1800. Hon. Egbert Benson, onc of the Justices of the Supreme Court, presiding. But there must have been Sessions of the Supreme Court in the county previous to this term, the minutes of which have been lost.
Judge BENSON, who presided at the Circuit Court, to which we have alluded, was one of the most illustrious jurists of his times. Hc rendered eminent service dur- ing the whole period of the Revolutionary War. In 1777 he was appointed Attorney-General-the first At- torncy-General of the State. In that office, in the Legislature, and in Congress, his devotion to the public interest was unremitted, and in the able, constant, accu- rate discharge of all his official duties, he scarcely had an equal. As a lawyer he was possessed of the highest qualifications-qualifications which he carried to the Bench, where they were blended with many judicial accomplishments. Hc discharged the duties of Attor- ney-General until January 28th, 1794, when he was ap- pointed a Justice of the Supreme Court. In January, 1802, he was appointed an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court, and resigned his seat on the bench of the State Supreme Court.
Judge Benson's charge to the Grand Jury, at this term of Circuit Court held by him, to which we have re- ferred, was regarded as a model production. There was in it a prophetic glance at the future, which has been most signally fulfilled. He said : " In proportion as your County, gentlemen, increases in wealth and population ; as it advances in public improvement, in education, in arts, science, commercial prosperity, which must flow from its unsurpassed resources, there will be a corresponding growth of crime-the insepar- able companion of great public prosperity.
" Your County, gentlemen, over which the smoke of battlefields has but recently floated, has before it a magnificent future. Upon grand juries ; upon courts of justice ; upon all officers of courts, and upon all persons connected with the administration of the laws, rest solemn responsibilities, which are to tell on that future ; for now is the seed timc-now is the ground fallow which is to yield fruit for generations to come. See to it, then, gentlemen, that the responsibility with which the law clothes you is properly executed and directed."
The Clerk of the Court of the County at this time was Leffert Lefferts, Jr., appointed April 5th, 1800. The Sheriff was Cornelius Bergen, appointed February 17th, 1800.
The Kings County bar at this time consisted of about fifteen lawyers. For many years its growth in numbers was very slow. As late as 1836 it numbered but twenty-one members. They were James B. Clark, Richard D. Covert, George C. Dixon, John Dikeman, Theodore Eames, Gabriel Furman, Wm. A. Green, Nathan B. Morse, Henry C. Murphy, Nathaniel Porter, Alpheus P. Rolph, Gilbert Reed, Wm. Rockwell, John Smally, Cyrus P. Smith, Wm. B. Waldo, and Nathaniel F. Waring. Fisk and Bridgeman was a successful law firm at Williamsburg.
But, to return to the Circuit we have been describ- ing. The first cause tried was that of John Van Nuys v. Peter Duryee. Peter R. Livingston, of Dutchess County, distinguished in the history of the State as a lawyer and legislator of commanding ability, appeared for the plaintiff. But, learned and sagacious as he was, a Kings County lawyer by the name of Rupp, succeeded in non-suiting him.
The last Court held at Flatbush was opened Monday, May 4th, 1832. As there was no judge present, the Sheriff, under the provisions of the Statute in such case made and provided, directed an adjournment until the next morning at 9 o'clock, when the Hon. Ogden Edwards, one of the Circuit Judges of the State, ap- peared and organized the Court in the usual manner, and the trial of causes commenced.
Judge Edwards was really the father of the Constitu- tional Convention of 1821, and one of the artisans of that instrument. In January, 1818, as member of the Assembly from the City of New York, he brought a
346
HISTORY OF KINGS COUNTY.
bill into that body for calling a State Convention for the purpose of changing the Constitution, in regard to the appointment of officers by the abominated Council of Appointment, and in other matters. The bill for a convention passed, and it commenced its sittings Au- gust 28th, 1821. Judge Edwards was one of the dele- gates from New York. The delegate from the County of Kings was John Lefferts.
In this Convention, which enrolled among its mem- bers a large number of the most illustrious men, Judge Edwards took an active part in forming a new Consti- tution; in which, among other things, the Courts and the . Judiciary were reorganized, and he was, as we have seen, made one of the Circuit Judges of the reorganized Supreme Court.
The first Court held at Brooklyn held its sittings at the Apprentices Library. It was opened November 1st, 1832, Judge John Dikeman presiding. Abraham Van- derveer was clerk of the County, and ex-officio Clerk of the Court. John Lawrence was Sheriff, having been appointed March 15th, 1831, in place of John T. Bergen, who resigned the office of Sheriff early in March, 1831. Mr. Bergen was appointed Feb- ruary 12th, 1821, by the old Council of Appoint- ment, being the last officer for Kings County appointed before it was constitutionalized out of office. In No- vember, 1822, he was, at the first election held under the new Constitution, elected to the sheriffalty, dis- charging his duties with singular ability. At the gen- eral election, held in November, 1828, he was again elected to that office, serving from January 1st, 1829, to March 1st, 1831, when he resigned, having been elected in November, 1830, a representative in Con- gress from the then Second Congressional district, which included the County of Kings.
The Kings County bar, at this time (1883), numbers about twelve hundred members. We have already referred to the high character of this bar in the past. From an actual and pleasing acquaintance with many members of the present bar, it is no affectation to say that it loses nothing when compared with the most brilliant bar in the State.
It would be quite impossible to write a history of Kings County without some description of those whose lives are more or less interwoven with it; for it is im- possible to write biography without writing the history which its subjects contributed to make. Thus, the his- tory of the American Revolution could not be written without the biography of Washington ; that of Eng- land, without a personal description of Henry Eighth, Elizabeth, Cromwell, Pitt, Fox, and Victoria ; that of the Erie Canal, without a description of De Witt Clin- ton ; the history of the Great Rebellion without the biographies of Lincoln and his compatriots.
Biographies of Deceased Members of the Kings County Bar .- Biography is history in minia-
ture, occupying, perhaps, only a brief space, yet it is more or less connected with the great drama of human life. The personal reminiscences of some may be con- fined almost entirely to the vale of obscurity; while those of others may be so interwoven with public affairs that it may be difficult to determine where biography ends, and where history begins.
The task of gathering the fast fading reminiscences of those who have, in the past, adorned the Bench and the Bar of this County, and whose places have been ren- dered vacant by death, has been one of much toil and dif- ficulty, with a success somewhat limited. For, in this preoccupied age, the all-absorbing incidents of the pres- ent, and the intensified hopes of the future, create for- getfulness of the past.
It is, for many reasons, scarcely less difficult to arrange the incidents connected with the carcer of the living members of the bar for biographical purposes. The former will first occupy our attention.
We begin with one who, over half a century ago, not only adorned the bar of Kings County, but one who had no superior in the ranks of the profession in the State or Nation. This was:
JOHN WELLS, for many years the acknowledged leader of the bar of the State of New York, was born at Cherry Val- ley, Otsego County, N. Y., in the year 1770. His father, John Wells, was a farmer of Cherry Valley, who, with his whole family, was murdered in Brandt's descent upon that place in November, 1778. Nearly every resident of the vil- lage shared the same fate, young Wells escaping death at the hands of the savages only by a miraculous intervention of Providence.
"Cut off at this early age from the tenderest attachments of life, and, like Logan, left without one living mortal who was naturally interested in his fate, young Wells would have been either abandoned to poverty, or bent down to the ordi- nary drudgery of life, had it not been for an affectionate aunt, who interposed in his behalf and formed him to a higher destiny. Through her influence and aid he was placed at a Grammar School in Schenectady, where he remained several years. His aunt removed to Brooklyn, and young Wells was placed under the instruction of Rev. Mr. Cutting, of Jamaica, an accomplished scholar and an eloquent preacher. He pursued his studies diligently with Mr. Cut- ting two years, with such success that he was fully prepared to enter Princeton College, from whence he graduated in 1778, taking both degrees, A. B. and A. M.
Choosing the legal profession for his calling in life, he en- tered the office of Mr. Edward Griswold, an eminent coun- sellor of the city of New York, as a student at law. Mr. Griswold, after attaining a high position at the bar, retired from practice and became a resident of Hempstead, Queens County, N. Y. Col. Aaron Burr used to say of Mr. Griswold, that he was the only man he ever saw who loved the black- lettered lore of the common law for its own sake. The ex- ample alone of such a man was of great advantage to Wells."
On concluding his clerkship he was thrown upon his own resources ; and these were nothing beyond his profession. His residence was in Brooklyn, but he opened an office in Pine street, New York. He was located among a large num- ber of lawyers, who, in a measure, monopolized business ; and for a long time, his prospects were discouraging. He had been in business but a short time when he was united by
347
LEGAL BIOGRAPHIES.
marriage to Miss Mary Lawrence, daughter of Thomas Law- rence, of Newtown, Queens County, New York. To use the language of another : "If his bride did not bring him a for- tune, she brought what was more important-evenness of temper, patience and fortitude, which enlightened, sustained and smoothed his passage along an obscure and rugged path to fortune and eminence ; illumed the gloomy period of ad- verse vicissitude, and cheered his rising hopes with the smile of sympathy and affection." But so slow was Mr. Wells' pro- gress in his profession, that between the years 1801 and 1804, he often said that he had serious thoughts of abandoning it.
About this time he began writing anonymously for the journals of the day. Such was the strength, beauty and in- terest of his productions, that they soon gave him flattering distinction.
Alexander Hamilton, having read some of Mr. Wells' arti- cles, so greatly admired them that he sought out their author and personally complimented him on the genius he had displayed as an essayist. This flattering attention, from a personage so illustrious, greatly encouraged the young law- yer, and his pen became his employment and a source of in- come until he took his proper place at the bar. An oppor- tunity for this was soon afforded. Mr. Cheetham, editor of the American Citizen, a leading Journal in New York, had been prosecuted by Mr. W. S. Smith, the son-in-law of Presi- dent Adams, for a libel published in his paper. This action created great interest throughout the nation. It grew out of the heated condition of the politics of that day, involv- ing the reputation and fortunes of several persons now illus- trious in history.
" Mr. Cheetham, it is said, reasoning from the force with which Wells had wielded his pen in certain political and other articles, retained him as his counsel for the defense- not merely his counsel, but the leading counsel in the case. This was a great surprise to all of Cheetham's friends ; but the result shows that he made no mistake in his selection of counsel. The cause came on for trial in the city of New York early in 1804. The prosecution was conducted by sev- eral of the ablest lawyers then at the bar. The defense of Cheetham, by his young and apparently inexperienced coun- sel, as has well been said, was masterly ; it would have added luster to the reputation of Wirt. The result was highly favorable to his client. The damages against him were mitigated to a trifle, compared with what was confidently expected on onc side and feared on the other." Nothing could exceed the surprise wliich this splendid-we may say tri- umphant defense-created in the public mind; and the young advocate at once took that high and commanding place at the bar for which his talents so admirably fitted him. Fromn a stinted business and a few clients, whose visits had hitherto been "few and far between," he was daily retained in cases of importance and of pecuniary value to him. Not long after the trial of Smith vs. Cheetham, he was retained in an important case tried at Flatbush, in which he displayed skill, learning and eloquence that added largely to his fame. His opponent was Col. Aaron Burr, who often appeared in the Kings County Courts. After the trial Burr said, " I was aware of Mr. Wells' power and astonishing ability as a writer, but I did not think he possessed, as he really does, the genius of an Erskine as a lawyer."
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.