History of the city of Toledo and Lucas County, Ohio, Part 103

Author: Waggoner, Clark, 1820-1903
Publication date: 1888
Publisher: New York and Toledo : Munsell & Company
Number of Pages: 1408

USA > Ohio > Lucas County > Toledo > History of the city of Toledo and Lucas County, Ohio > Part 103

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).

This event having occurred during a term of Court, the Bar deemed it proper to signalize the same by holding a festival, a report of which was prepared "for the Bar only," and was not published until some 30 years there- after. It was as follows :

At a meeting of the Bar in attendance at the Court of Common Pleas for Lucas County, to take into consideration the present condition of the Bench of said County, "Count " Coffinbury was called to the Chair.

On motion of D. O. Morton, which was seconded by J. C. Spink, the meeting adopted the following unanimously :

" WHEREAS, we are informed that Judge Potter, the Presiding Judge of this Court, is about to enter the matrimonial state, by which the sum of his earthly happiness is to be immeasurably enhanced ; and

" WHEREAS, so happy an event is a fitting cause for rejoicing and festivity ; therefore, .

" We, the undersigned, members of the Court and Bar, will meet at Mr. Neeley's Hotel, in Miami, this (Thursday) evening, to partake of a supper to be pre- pared for the occasion."

On motion, J. C. Spink and D. O. Morton were appointed as Committee of Arrangements.

On motion, all of the officers of Lucas County were invited to join said meeting. ANDREW COFFINBURY, Chairman.

At 9 o'clock P. M., the guests assembled around the sumptuous repast (which "mine host" of the " Miami" knows how to get up). James Myers, " Clerk of said Court," was appointed President for the occasion, and Morrison R. Waite, Vice-President.

After the supper was concluded, an ode (composed expressly for the occasion at the request of the Bar, by Andrew Coffinbury) was sung to the tune of Auld Lang Syne, by John Brownlee and others, with great applause. After which the meeting were en- tertained with several songs, together with the follow- ing toasts :

By James Myers. Judge Potter-May the issue which he this night joined result in a long family record.

By Henry Reed, Jr. Hon. E. D. Potter-May his subsequent life be as his Judicial career has been honorable.

By John C. Spink. Judge Potter-May the de- cision he has this night made, never be overruled or reversed.

By T. C. Worder. The Bride-By her union, a bright star has been plucked from the galaxy of virgin loveliness. May she become a central orb, around which diamonds of beauty may cluster in transcen- dent and glowing effulgence.

By D. F. Cook. Judge Potter-May the suit he has this evening instituted prove an amicable one.

By James M. Coffinbury. Our President Judge- May he prove as kind a Husband as he is a Judge ; and as tender to his offspring as he has been urbane and gentlemanly to the younger portion of the mem- bers of the Bar, who have grown up around him.

Fitch, John. Fuller, Rathbun.

Ford, Samuel A.

Ritchie, Byron F. Rike, John C.

Reno, Benjamin F.

Seney, Joshua R.

Hanahan, P.

Smith, Barton. Smith, Alex. L.

Southard, James H.

Southard, Elisha B.

Scribner, Charles H.

Scribner, Harvey.

Rouse, Birdseye W.

Eckert, Edgar H. Eaton, Charles. Ford, Joseph D.

Potter, Emery D., jr.

Cochran, Robert H. Coldham, Ashton H. Calder, J. R. Corkery, Thomas J. Cook, D. F. (Maumee)

*Potter, Emery D.

Knisely, Isaac E. Kent, Charles. Kent, Charles E. Kinney, Guy W.

Wright, Frank E.

523

LUCAS BENCHI AND BAR.

By D. O. Morton. After some incidental remarks appropriate to the occasion, he asked leave to read a sentiment he had cut from a newspaper.

By Andrew Cottinbury. The President of this Judicial Circuit-IIis declaration is good, his plea sound, his replication complete, and his verdict happy.

By Thomas Clark 2d. Mrs. Potter-May the judgment she has this night obtained never be reversed by a higher tribunal.

By Benj. P. Smith. The Associate Judges of Lu- cas County-They have set the President Judge a good example ; may he follow it.

By Horace F. Waite. My Brother Bachelors-May we very soon file our declaration in Cupid's Court ; may love draw up the plea, and affection the rejoinder; with bashfulness alone demurring ; and the verdict be the loss of liberty ; wife the docket fce, and the babies the legal tender for costs.

On motion of Henry Reed, Jr., the meeting ad- journed to the sitting-room of the Hotel, when the ode was loudly called for ; after which Mr. Spink re- sponded to a call, rehearsing a highly amusing patent sermon, in which he delineated the style of the pop- ular preaching of the day.

On motion, the meeting adjourned, without date. JAMES MYERS, President. M. R. WAITE, Vice-President.

Beside the persons above named, F. L. Nich- ols (then an Associate Judge), Captain Amos Pratt, Charles K. Scott, Wm. Carter and H. T. Smith (Editor of the Maumee River Times) took part on the occasion. Of those named in that connection, the only ones now known to be living are M. R. Waite, Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court ; Judge Potter and F. L. Nichols of Toledo ; Henry Reed, Jr., of California ; D. F. Cook, of Maumee ; J. M. Coffinbury, of Cleveland ; and Win. Carter, of Bryan, Ohio. Mrs. Potter died very suddenly March 14, 1847, aged 24. A son 6 months old died the day previous. The only surviving child of the mother, was Emery D. Potter, Jr., now of Toledo. Mrs. Potter was highly es- teemed by a large circle of friends.

THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

As stated elsewhere, the first term of the Supreme Court in Lucas County at which ma- terial business was transacted, was in 1838. There was, however, a short term at which some formal matters were transacted held in July, 1837, presided over by Judges Ebenezer Lane and Reuben Wood; in 1838 the Court was held by Judges Lane and Grimke; in 1839, by Lane and Wood; in 1840, by Wood and Peter Hitchcock; in 1841 and 1842, no session of this Court was held in this County. In 1843, it was held by Wood and Matthew Burchard ; in 1844, by Wood and Nathaniel C. Reed ; in 1845 and 1846, by Wood and Burch- ard; in 1847 and 1848, by Burehard and Ed- ward Avery ; in 1849, by Hitchcock and Wil- liam B. Caldwell; in 1850, by Hitchcock and Rufus P. Spalding ; and in 1851, by Hitchcock and Caldwell.

The new State Constitution went into effect in 1851, and the District Court was created

which took the place of the old County Su- preme Court. The District Court was held in the respective years by the following named Judges, to wit :

1852, by Thomas W. Bartley of the Supreme Court, and Samuel Humphreyville and Lucius B. Otis. 1853, by Otis, Humphreyville and Starkweather.

1854, by Otis, Humphreyville and Horace Foote.

1855, by Otis, Starkweather, Fitch and Foote.

1856, by Otis, Humphreyville and Stark weather.

1857, by Thomas Bolton, James S. Carpenter and Jesse P. Bishop.

1858, by Sebastian F. Taylor, Carpenter, Bishop and Foote.

1859, by Foote, Carpenter and Samuel T. Worcester. 1860, by Jacob Brinkerhoff of the Supreme Court, and Bolton and Foote.

1861, by Foote, Worcester, Bishop and Taylor.

1862, by Milton Sutliff of the Supreme Court, Foote and John L. Greene.

1863, by Josiah Scott of the Supreme Court (father of Alex. W. Scott, now of the Toledo Bar), Bolton, and James M. Coflinbury.

1864, by William White of the Supreme Court, Foote and Stevenson Burke.

1865, by Foote, Bolton and Coffinbury,

1866, by Brinkerhoff, Foote and Burke.

1867, by Luther Day of the Supreme Court, Foote and Samuel B. Prentiss.

1868, by Scott, Foote and Prentiss.

1869, by John Welch of the Supreme Court, Walter F. Stone and W. W. Boynton.

1870, by Foote, Prentiss and Boynton.

1871, by Day, Foote and Prentiss.

1872, by Foote, Charles E. Pennewell and Samnel W. McClure.

1873, by Foote, Boynton and Robert F. Payne. 1874, by Payne, McClure and Darius Cadwell.

1875, by Prentiss, MeClure and Cadwell.

1876, by Prentiss, Cadwell and J. M. Jones.

1877, by Prentiss, Cadwell and Jesse H. McMath. 1878-9, by Jones, G. M. Barber and E. T. Hamilton. 1880, by Jones, Hale and Cadwell.

1881, by Barber, Hamilton and S. E. Williamson.

1882, by Cadwell, Jones and Henry MeKinney.

1883, by IIamilton, Barber and J. E. Ingersoll.

1884, by Mckinney, Jones and John W. Heisley.

By an amendment to the Constitution adopt- ed in 1884, a Circuit Court was created, which commenced in February, 1885, when Judges William H. Upson, Charles C. Baldwin and George R. Haynes were elected, and have held the Court here since that date, two terms each year being held in each County of the Cirenit.

There were 27 Common Pleas Judges elected in 1851, under the Constitution which then went into effect. Of these it is believed that the following only are now living: Stanley Matthews, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States; Judges Warden and Whitman, both ex-Judges of the Supreme Court of Ohio; Judge Bates of the Columbus Distriet ; Judge Otis of our District ; and .Judge Welker, who is mentioned in connection with the Federal Judiciary.

It will be seen from the above record, that Judge Horace Foote of Cleveland, held District Court in Lucas County in 16 different years ; and that there was not a term of the District

5.24

HISTORY OF TOLEDO AND LUCAS COUNTY.

Court in this County omitted during the exist- ence of that Court.

THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY.

By act of Congress, passed February 10, 1855, the State of Ohio was divided into two Judicial Districts-the Northern, with the Courts at Cleveland ; and the Southern, with the Courts at Cincinnati.

In July, 1870, an aet was passed providing for the holding of two terms of the District Court at Toledo, annually, at such times as the District Judge should fix, but giving to it no term of the Circuit Court. Judge Charles T. Sherman was then the Judge, and held several terms of the District Court here. In 1873 he resigned, and Martin Welker was appointed to succeed him by President Grant, on the 28th of November, 1873. Judge Welker held his first term at Toledo in December of that year, and with three terms at Cleveland and two at Toledo annually, has not missed holding his Court since.

On the 8th of June, 1878, by aet of Congress, the Northern District of Ohio was divided into the Eastern and Western Subdivisions, the Western Division consisting of Lucas, Williams, Defiance, Paulding, Van Wert, Mercer, Au- glaize, Allen, Putnam, Henry, Fulton, Wood, Hancock, Hardin, Logan, Union, Delaware, Marion, Wyandot, Seneca, Sandusky, Ottawa, Erie and Huron Counties. The act required all suits of a local nature in the Circuit and District Courts against a single defendant, res- ident of the State, to be brought in the Subdi- vision in which he should reside; and where there were two or more defendants, residing in different Divisions, permitting the action to be brought in either of these. It made all of- fenses cognizable and indictable in the Division where committed, and required all Jurors to be residents thereof.

This act made Toledo a judicial centre for the territory embraced in the Subdivision. The business of the Court has been very important, and has brought to our City many of the lead- ing lawyers of the country. During the period covered by the sessions of the Court at Toledo, the Railroads of the country have furnished an important part of its work. Foreclosures of mortgages, administration of Railroad proper- ties by the instrumentality of Receivers, and the sale of the property, have been a part of the work of nearly every term. The Toledo, Cincinnati and St. Louis; the Wabash, St. Louis and Pacific ; the Ohio Central ; the Mich- igan and Ohio ; the Toledo and Indianapolis, and its successor, the Toledo, Columbus and Southern, are among the Railroad Companies that have furnished such litigation in the Wes- tern Division, and have furnished a large and lucrative business to the legal profession. Two terms of the District and Circuit Courts are

held annually at Toledo (in June and Decem- ber), each lasting in six to eight weeks of ac- tive work.

At the time of the organization of the West- ern Division, Judge H. H. Emmons of Detroit, was the Judge of the Circuit comprising the States of Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky and Ten- nessee, but Judge Emmons never presided at To- ledo. He was succeeded by Judge John Baxter of Knoxville, Tennessee, a man of immense energy, indomitable will and remarkable abil- ity. He was somewhat a terror to the Bar, until he became known and his methods under- stood. He would dispose of a case in the most arbitrary manner, without hearing counsel, and often without hearing the evidence beyond a point which he thought decisive. He was no respecter of persons. The most distinguished member of the Bar had no greater considera- tion shown him than the humblest and least known. He grew on the profession. As they came to recognize his wonderful perception, his impatience at the "law's delays" and the consumption of time by attorneys which he deemed unnecessary, his absolute impartiality and integrity, the lawyers fell into his way of disposing of business contentedly after the first few years, and the remark would be often made, " He shoots quick, but very straight." Off the Bench, he was genial, kind and sociable, an en- tertaining talker, and fond of his brethren and their company. During the war Judge Baxter was an uncompromising and fearless friend of the Union, and showed it in many ways that ex- hibited his nerve and unconquerable will in a place where it was not free from danger. He died at Hot Springs, Arkansas, in 1886, and was succeeded by Judge Howell E. Jackson, of Nashville, Tennessee, who was tendered a com- plimentary banquet by the Bar of Toledo on his arrival here, at which Judge Doyle presided, and which was largely attended. Judge Jack- son won his way quickly to the confidence of the Bar, and is distinguished for his courtesy, his scholarship in the law, and the patient hearing he gives every case he tries.

Judge Welker has presided over both Courts in the absence of the Circuit Judge, and has done the bulk of the business. His 15 years of judicial work on the Federal Bench, commenc- ing as it did at Toledo, entitles him to a place in this history, although not a resident of Lucas County. He was born in Knox County, Ohio. April 25, 1819, was educated in the District Schools ; at the age of 18 entered a law office in Millersburg, Holmes County, and was ad- mitted to practice in 1841. He was Clerk of the Courts of Holmes County from 1846 to 1851. In 1848 he was nominated by the Whigs for Congress, but was defeated. In 1851 he was elected Judge of the Court of Common Pleas in the Sixth District, and served the full term of five years, being renominated in 1856. In 1857 he was elected Lieutenant-Governor of Ohio on

525

LUCAS BENCH AND BAR.

the ticket with Salmon P. Chase, who was at the same time elected Governor. At the break- ing out of the War he was appointed a Major on the staff of General J. D. Cox; afterwards Judge-Advocate-General on the staff of Gover- nor Dennison ; and still later (1862) was As- sistant Adjutant-General of the State. In the same year he was nominated for Congress in the Wooster District, but defeated by 36 votes. In 1864 he was again nominated for Congress and elected from the Fourteenth Ohio District, serving in the 39th Congress. He was re- elected in 1866, and again in 1868, and in No- vember, 1873, as already stated, he was ap- pointed by President Grant District Judge for the Northern District of Ohio. Judge Welker is in every sense a self- made man, and his career has been a remarkable series of continued ad- vancements. He deserves them all. A scholar -largely self-educated, he received the degree of Doctor of Laws from the Wooster University, in which he is Professor of Politieal Science and Constitutional and International Law. A states- man-he has by his work in Congress made a lasting and valuable reputation, and as a lawyer and jurist he has been honored by a seat on the State and Federal Judiciary, where his ripe judgment, his clear discernment, and his np- right and pure character have been of special service to the profession and the litigants who come under his jurisdiction.

MORRISON REMICK WAITE was born at Lyme, Connecticut, November 29, 1816. His father, Henry Matson Waite, was also a native of Lyme, where he was born February 9, 1787. The father was graduated at Yale College, and atter completing the study of his profession, entered upon the practice of the law at Lyme, in which he soon attained prominent position. He was chosen, successively, as Representative and Senator in the State Legislature. In 1834, his qualities as jurist were recognized in his appointment as Associate Judge of the Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut; and subse- quently in his unanimons election by the Leg- islature to the Chief Justiceship of the State, from which position he was withdrawn in 1857, by the Constitutional age limit of 70 years for incumbents of that office. The Waite family settled at Lyme before 1700, where its members have for nearly 200 years held prominent posi- tions in different spheres of active life. These included Marvin Waite, who, as Presidential Elector, cast a vote for Washington at his first election in 1789. He was one of the Commis- sioners appointed to sell the lands belonging to Connecticut in the Connecticut Western Re- serve, Ohio, the proceeds of which sale now constitute the Connecticut School Fund. The mother of the subject of this sketch was a grand- daughter of Colonel Samuel Selden, commander of a Connecticut Regiment in the Army of the

Revolution ; was made prisoner September 17, 1776, at the evacuation of New York; died October 11th following, in the " Old Provost ;" and was buried in the old " Brick Church" yard, where the New York Times office now stands, his fellow-prisoners by special permis- sion being allowed to attend his funeral in uni- form. Morrison R. Waite was graduated at Yale in 1837, his class ineluding several men subsequently of National reputation, among whom were Wm. M. Evarts, Edwards Pierre- pont and Benjamin Silliman, Jr. Samuel J. Tilden was of the same elass, though, from poor health, was unable to graduate with those here named. Selecting the profession of the law as his life-work, Mr. Waite commenced reading in his father's office ; but accepting the view then so prevalent at the East as to wider and more hopeful fields for activity at the then " Far West," he left Lyme in October, 1838, for the Maumee Valley, settling at Mau- mee City. Here he at once renewed his law reading in the office of Samuel M. Young, who had preceded him to that locality in 1835. Upon his admission to the Bar in 1839, the firm of Yonng & Waite was formed, the junior at once taking upon himself the larger portion of detail in work. This included much horse- back travel and other severe labor, in attend- ance at Courts in other Counties, in the col- lection of claims from scattered debtors, and other business. In 1850, Mr. Waite removed to Toledo, where the firm opened an office and continued the practice until January, 1856, when, upon the retirement of Mr. Young, a brother, Richard Waite, became a partner, and the firm of M. R. & R. Waite was formed, which continued for a period of 18 years, and until the senior was appointed Chief Justice, when it was succeeded by that of R. & E. T. Waite, the junior being a son of the retiring partner, which firm yet continues. Though never a partisan in any objectionable sense of the term, Mr. Waite from early life had clear con- victions upon questions of public policy, and took an active part in support of the same. A Whig in sentiment, he co-operated with that party until it was merged into the Republican organ- ization in 1854, since which time he has acted with the latter. The different publie positions held by him, were all conferred withont his seeking. As shown by the political record elsewhere given, he was early active in local political affairs. He was first a candidate for public office in 1846, as the Whig nominee for Congress, in a strongly Democratic district, his opponent, William Sawyer, being elected. In 1849 Mr. Waite was chosen as Representa- tive to the State Legislature, serving in that body with special eredit. He was a candidate for Delegate to the State Constitutional Con- vention in 1850, failing of an election in conse- quence of the strongly adverse political ma- jority. Mr. Waite's most prominent relation

526

HISTORY OF TOLEDO AND LUCAS COUNTY.

to political matters was that held in 1-62. and was incident to the question then arising in regard to the War policy of the Government. In common with a large portion of the Re- publicans and many Democrats of the Toledo Congressional District, he was in full sympathy with President Lincoln's purpose to make the preservation of the Union through the sup- pression of the Rebellion the paramount end of all war measures in that connection. Opposed to such policy, were a large portion of the Re- publican party in the District, who held that the abolition of Slavery at the South should be made a condition in any terms for peace. As a result of such disagreement, two District Conventions were held, representing these two adverse policies. The one composed of Repub- lieans and what were known as War Demo- crats, nominated Mr. Waite for Congress, who, with much hesitation, accepted the position. The other Convention selected James M. Ash- ley, the Republican incumbent, as its candidate. While the Democrats of Lucas, Wood and Ful- ton Connties, with great nnanimity, supported Mr. Waite, the members of that party in the other Counties of the District, from considera- tions of party strategy, voted for a third candi- date. the result being the re-election of Mr. Ashley. In Toledo. Mr. Waite then received 1,806 votes, out of 2,447 votes cast, while his plurality in the County was, 1,346, in a total vote of 4,163. No other popular endorsement of equal emphasis had been given a citizen of that County. Upon the refusal of Hocking II. Hunter to accept the seat on the State Su- preme Bench, to which he was elected in 1863, Governor Brough tendered the position to Mr. Waite, by whom it was declined. His reputa- tion as a sound and able lawyer and conserva- tive citizen had become so far National, that in December, 1871, President Grant selected him as one of the Counsel for the United States in the Arbitration at Geneva, involving the settle- ment of what were known as the " Alabama Claims" of the Government against Great Britain. For such position Mr. Waite possessed the special qualities of great industry and abil- ity in research and argument, which were made conspicuous and effective on that memorable occasion, and secured for bis labors historical recognition. His presentation of the question of Great Britain's liability in permitting Con- federate War Steamers to obtain in British ports supplies for hostilities against American shipping, commanded marked attention both from that tribunal and from the world. En- tering that service with a reputation more limited than was that of either of his associate Counsel, the close of the trial found him in that respect second to none. Returning to Toledo in 1872, he resumed his practice. In 1873 he was elected without opposition as a member of the Convention called to revise the State Con- stitution, and upon the assembling of that body,

he was chosen as its President. It was during the session of this Convention at Cincinnati, in January, 1874, that the successive nominations of George H. Williams and Caleb Cushing for Chief Justice, to succeed Sahnon P. Chase, de- ceased, were presented and withdrawn by President Grant. The third name communi- cated to the Senate was that of Mr. Waite, which was done withont the knowledge of that gentleman, who had positively withheld his approval of any steps by his friends in that direction. The announcement of the nomina- tion was received by the Constitutional Con- vention with special demonstration of pleasure, and a resolution strongly approving the same was at once introduced to that body, and by him, as its presiding officer, ruled out of order. The Senate, by unanimous vote, approved the nomination. It so happened that only a year previous to his appointment as Chief Justice, Mr. Waite was admitted to practice in the Su- preme Court, and upon the motion of Mr. Cushing. Ilis appointment was received by the citizens of Toledo with marks of special gratification. The Bar at once met and made expression both of approval and of its high ap- preciation of Mr. Waite's personal and profes- sional worth. A proposition for a banquet was, at his request, changed to an informal reeep- tion, held at the residence of William Baker, Esq., February 3, 1874, which was attended by large numbers of citizens, glad to congratulate the appointee on the high honor conferred, and to assure him of their wish for success in his new position. Ile left Toledo for Washing- ton on the 13th of February, and assumed the office of Chief Justice by taking the prescribed oath, March 4th, following. He is now (No- vember, 1887) nearing the close of his 14th year of service, in the full enjoyment of wonted mental and physical capacities, and in eminent- ly successful administration of the highest judicial position of the World. The capacity of mind and endurance, which throughout had distinguished his professional life, are only made more conspicuous and effective in his present position. The excessive labor de- manded for the research and study of facts, anthorities and principles of jurisprudence, and their just application, could be properly met only with. resources to be supplied by long prac- tice of energy and self-denying toil; and it may be mentioned here, for the benefit of young men in all departments of active life, that Chief Justice Waite recognizes in his present capacity for labor, the direct result and chief reward of the years of severe work, without apparent re- turn, spent in his early practice. The result has been all that he or the country could ask. During no equal period have adjudications of that august tribunal been attended with more complete success, either in the correctness of its decisions or in their acceptance by parties and the public. Its action has involved points of

Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.

History of the city of Toledo and Lucas County, Ohio, Part 103

Author: Waggoner, Clark, 1820-1903 Publication date: 1888 Publisher: New York and Toledo : Munsell & Company Number of Pages: 1408

Author: Waggoner, Clark, 1820-1903
Publication date: 1888
Publisher: New York and Toledo : Munsell & Company
Number of Pages: 1408