Twentieth century history of Altoona and Blair County, Pennsylvania, and representative citizens, Part 14

Author: Sell, Jesse C 1872-
Publication date: 1911
Publisher: Chicago, Richmond-Arnold Publishing
Number of Pages: 1036

USA > Pennsylvania > Blair County > Altoona > Twentieth century history of Altoona and Blair County, Pennsylvania, and representative citizens > Part 14

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).

John A. Blodget was a frequent visitor from Bedford, where he practiced until he retired. He generally walked from Bed- ford, and was in his place when court was called. He was a tall gentleman, dignified yet free and social in his intercourse. He was a man of fine literary taste and attain- ments. He could write a legal opinion, or a poem, with equal ease. The ludicrous in- cidents of the bar were often rendered by this versatile gentleman in verse, and I know of no one in all this bar of fifty years of life who was like him, and could make himself so appreciable to his fellows.

Not many years after the organization of the county, came from Bedford, David H. Hofins. His father was a German physi- cian, and coming to this country as a young man, he married, and David was born and educated here, graduating at Franklin and Marshall college. He was, during his short life, for he died in 1859, concerned in nearly all the important litigation of his time. His erect and well apparelled form gave him an imposing appearance. He was a bachelor, but most loyally recognized the claims of society, which then was conspicuous for its refinement and amenities. He was the idol of the people and it was common to hear him extolled as the "model lawyer." The moment of his passing came early in his career, and as blindness became from day to day more imminent upon the unhappy man, the writer willingly helped him in his last work till the end came. It was my sad task to pen the sketch which told of his virtues and his frailties, to close his affairs, and place the stone that now marks his resting place.

One more name of the fifty-two remains to be noted, George W. Taylor. He was then 34 years of age and resident at Hunt- ingdon. He early gave promise of the fu- ture jurist. His prosecution of the case of the Commonwealth vs. McConaughy in 1840, and the Flanigans in Cambria county

HISTORY OF BLAIR COUNTY

in 1842, on indictments for murder, it was customarily said, drew him from obscurity and established him permanently in the pub- lic estimation as a great lawyer. He suc- ceeded Judge Black as president judge, April 5, 1849, and remained upon the bench till November, 1871. He tried many im- portant cases and was widely known in the state and recognized by the supreme court as an able and learned judge. His later years to some extent were given to agricul- tural pursuits and though of great learning and judicial acumen, he was a man of plain manners and practical sense and wisdom. His prepared opinions disclosed no attempts at useless embellishment, but were simple, plain and strong. They thus furnished no rhetorical entertainment but they addressed the perception of the mind and left it over- whelmed with conviction. He was a man of very social habit. In the old court house it was his daily custom to linger at the stove, or some other gathering place with McMur- trie. Calvin, Scott, Dean, Hewit and others of us around him to listen to his many sto- ries of people and things, till, in many in- stances, suitors, jurors, and counsel had noted a lost half hour by the clock. But when he ascended to the bench the familiar- ity of the social intercourse just related was left behind and as his eye swept the bar and the crowded spaces beyond, he was again the "judge" and the dignity and the power of the law seemed to cover him as with a garment.

In closing these reminiscences of the first lawyers, I cannot omit mention of George A. Coffey, though he was not one of the original members. He came from the minis- try to the bar about 1850. He was then in the full possession of developed mental power and learning. He was gifted, unique and brilliant. He was a scholar, an orator, a lawyer, though he had not the time to be- come a great lawyer. He was cultured, so- cial and admired. His conversational pow- ers were a delight to all who knew him and won him a welcome everywhere. This fac-

ulty, and it was the chief of his gifts, never seemed to desert him. His cordial reception of the writer at his bedside, not many days before his death, and his pleasant, cheerful conversation though under the sad circum- stances of a fatal illness, seemed to show it would abide till the end. He died in Phil- adelphia, whither he went in 1861, to ac- cept the appointment of United States dis- trict attorney from President Lincoln.

Under the constitution of that date, lay- men were appointed, afterwards elected, as- sociate judges. Thev sat with the president judge and formed an important adjunct of the court. The first of this class of judges were George R. McFarlane and Daniel Mc- Connell. The latter was a man of strong mind and great practical intelligence and enjoyed the confidence of all who knew him. Judge McFarlane was then, and had been for years, a well-known man. He was the proprietor of a foundry and machine works in this town, and evinced great.energy and uprightness in his business. He was en- gaged in many schemes of social reform and enjoyed a notoriety through all the neigh- boring counties. He was greatly loved by many, and respected by all who knew him. His untimely death-the result of an acci- dent in his foundry in 1852-was deeply mourned by the entire community, and in- flicted upon it a loss felt for many years.

In all the county has had nineteen asso- ciate judges. The constitution of 1873 dis- pensed with them by making this county a single judicial district.

Davis Brooke succeeded Judge McCon- nell in January, 1848. Judge Brooke was a man of fine personal appearance and great dignity. His snow white hair was in pleas- ing contrast with his florid complexion. The conventional black dress of that day, admi- rably supplemented those evidences of his advanced age, and harmoniously accompa- nied the striking appearance of his chief, Judge Black.

In the second year of Judge Brooke's term, there occurred a most interesting ju-

AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS

dicial incident. It served to demonstrate the existence then of a cerebral or psychical influence as hypnotism is now.

There came to the county seat one day a man of the name of Henry Loomis, and his wife, Submit C. Loomis. They advertised to give lectures on mesmerism, to be illus- trated and manifested by exhibitions of its influence upon a susceptible subject. This subject was their daughter, Martha. Whilst these exhibitions were being nightly given with great success, one C. J. Sykes appeared upon the scene and employed Mr. Banks and Mr. Cresswell to take out upon the al- lowance of Judge Brooke a writ of habeas corpus, to take and restore to him his wife, Martha, who was 21 years of age, and who, by her father and mother was deprived of her liberty : he further alleged that she was, under the spell of their mesmeric influence, deprived of her free will; her affections di- verted from the relator, her husband, her health, physically and mentally, being sapped, and she herself was being sacrificed to the greed of her parents, who could not entertain their audiences without her.

To this the respondent replied that Mar- tha was married to Sykes in New York, but immediately thereafter he began to abuse her and treated her with great cruelty, so that she fled to her parents for protection, and desired to remain with them.

The relator denied the allegations, alleg- ing mercenary motives on the part of the Loomises and praying to be allowed the companionship of his wife. Mr. Calvin and Mr. Hofius represented the parents, and during two or three days evidence was taken before Judge Brooke. Great interest was manifested by the public; not only whether there was a such a thing as mes- merism, but as to what would be done with Martha. The court house was packed with people, and public opinion and sympathy were sharply divided. Nearly a day was con- sumed in the argument of counsel, and dur- ing the entire progress of the case not a word had been uttered by the judge, and

speculation was rife as to when he would be prepared to decide the case. As soon as the last word was spoken by counsel the judge immediately rose to his feet, and, bowing with great dignity and with greater brevity, said, "Let Martha be discharged." The house instantly rang with cheers, and amid the wildest excitement Martha and her par- ents were fairly carried from the court room, while the wifeless Sykes was left to pursue his solitary way. It is remarkable that the record shows no final disposition of this case and the writer recalls it only from memory.

The business of the court grew slowly, though thirty-four suits were brought to the first term. The first suit brought was that of Joseph and Daniel Hollen vs. Thom- as Crissman. "Debt." No. 1I, July term, 1846; but there is no record of any judg- ment.

The first record of a case tried was that of Matthew Miller vs. Henry Burt, assumpsit ; with a verdict October 20, 1846, for plain- tiff of $139.45.

The first record of an action of ejectment was that of James Stevens vs. J. Helfmit- ter, in which there was on the 20th Octo- ber, 1846, a verdict for plaintiff.

During that same week five cases were tried, and one non-suit entered after the jury was sworn. Names of counsel are not given.

The first divorce suit was brought by Mary Armstrong against her erring and de- linquent husband, John. Mr. Coffey con- ducted the case and obtained for Mary the coveted decree.

The first execution was issued by James Murty vs. John Dougherty to obtain $23.75 and costs. The sheriff does not seem to have ever returned his writ.

The first case in which was made a mo- tion for a new trial was in Bride & McKee- hans vs. Zechariah G. Brown, No. 23, August term, 1843, brought from Huntingdon county. The verdict was for plaintiffs for $663.53, and Mr. Brown's dissatisfaction is

100

HISTORY OF BLAIR COUNTY

expressed by his motion for a new trial. of Virginia. After the commonwealth had Judge Black was possibly no more favor- progressed in the trial Mr. Hammond, the district attorney, by leave of court took non-suits and the prisoner was released. able to re-trials than modern judges, and the motion was refused. Mr. Brown was in his day a well known citizen and litigant.

The first auditor appointed was Titian J. Coffey, on the 2d of January, 1847. This method of adjudicating many questions arising in the settlement of estates and dis- tribution of moneys has grown in favor and is employed with frequency and with con- venience to the court and bar at this time.

In the criminal department of the court there have been interesting cases, which, at the time of their disposition, elicited great professional as well as public attention. I recall some of them.

In June, 1855, a negro slave ran away from his master in Virginia, Mr. James Par- sons. He reached this town on his way to Canada, but was closely followed by Par- sons. As the negro entered a car early one morning to cross the mountain on the Old Portage railroad he was discovered by Mr. Parsons, who entered the car at the other end at the same time. The negro instantly fled, pursued by Mr. Parsons, who caught him at Gaysport and brought him down to a point near the present Kellerman house. The occurrence produced great excitement. The entire colored population was aroused and those staunch democrats, General George W. Potts, Major J. R. Crawford and Colonel John Piper, with other prominent white citizens, at once came to the aid of the slave, and under the guidance of Snyder Carr, a colored barber, and others of his race, the refugee was taken in charge and spirited away, so that he was seen no more. Parsons, however, was arrested upon the charge of kidnaping, assault and battery and breach of the peace and bound over to appear at the July session. Bills were found by the grand jury, but the trials were con- tinued to the October sessions. At the ap- pointed time Parsons appeared with his counsel, Charles J. Faulkner and J. Ran. dolph Tucker, appointed by the governor

At this time, in view of the fugitive slave law, public feeling ran very high and run- away slaves all over the north were aided by the whites in their attempted escapes. Besides, the appearance of such eminent counsel sent by the great commonwealth of Virginia gave the occurrence a significance and an eclat entirely exceptional in the his- tory of the bar.

Since the organization of this county there have been found by the grand jury forty-one indictments for murder. Of these four were found guilty of murder in the first degree. The others were either acquitted or convicted of manslaughter or murder in the second degree. The four who were con- victed of murder in the first degree were : Alex Hutchinson, killing a negro; James Shirley, killing his wife; David S. McKim, killing his young traveling companion, Sam- uel Norcross, and Dr. Lewis U. Beach, kill- ing his wife.

Hutchinson's case had a most unusual conclusion. He was convicted at the De- cember sessions, 1850, near the close of Governor W. F. Johnston's official term. For some reason not explained the warrant for the prisoner's execution was not issued by the governor before his term expired. Governor William Bigler succeeded him, and when his attention was called to the case, either for supposed legal reasons or from scruples of conscience, he declined to issue his warrant of death. Hutchinson re- mained a long time about the prison, help- ing in the daily work and going freely about the town, refusing to leave. One day, how- ever, he went quietly away, no man pursu- ing, and he died some years later in an east- ern county.

Shirley was hanged in 1853, and his was the first capital execution. George A. Cof- fey was the prosecuting attorney, having

101

AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS

been deputized by Joseph Kemp, who was the district attorney.

McKim's case attracted a good deal of at- tention. He had traveled to Altoona with young Norcross, a stranger here, won his confidence, beguiled him into leaving the train and going a short distance west of town, to obtain the little money he learned from him he possessed, he cruelly murdered him. The prosecution was conducted by Mr. Hammond and William A. Stoke, then an eminent and able lawyer, employed by the Pennsylvania railroad company.

The defendant relied upon Mr. Hofius. McKim was a large fine looking man, and seemed incapable of committing such a crime. The jury, on the 7th of May, 1857, convicted him, and he was executed on the 2Ist of August, following.

The most celebrated, however, of the homicide cases of the county, was the in- dictment and conviction of Dr. Beach. He was a practicing physician in Altoona, where he lived with his wife, but had no children. One morning at an early hour in the winter of 1884, he called at the house of Levi Knott, the brother of his wife, and in- formed him that he had killed his wife, but protested he had done the deed without present knowledge of the act. He was ar- rested and tried during that year and was convicted. Mr. Spang, Mr. Stevens and the writer defended him-the latter two by di- rection of the court. Hon. J. D. Hicks was then district attorney.

The defense was insanity, and the proof showed that twelve of his blood relatives were either idiotic or insane, furnishing the argument that there was a hereditary taint, or pre-disposition. Counsel for defense asked the court to rule that if the jury had a doubt as to his sanity, it should operate to reduce the grade of the offense to mur- der in the second degree. Judge Dean re- fused the point. Counsel endeavored to have the case reviewed by the supreme court, but the preliminary requisites could not be complied with, and the judgment of

the court was carried into effect on the 12th of February, 1885.

We might add that there has been a fifth conviction of murder in the first degree, in the case of Commonwealth vs. Frank Wil- son. As the case is still pending, we forbear to note it further.

Many other criminal prosecutions have been tried, which at the time engaged able counsel and elicited more than ordinary at- tention, but we do not find it necessary to particularize.

In 1874, we had the railroad riots at Al- toona and along the line of the railroad to Pittsburg. This gave rise to numerous prosecutions and the conviction of many persons engaged in those lawless and turbu- lent acts. These prosecutions were tried at the first court held in the present court house, which had just been completed and dedicated with the formal ceremonies re- ported and filed among the records of the court. It was on this occasion that Judge Dean delivered the address referred to in this history and Judge Black was present for the last time in the county seat.

A great many civil cases have been tried, and some of them conspicuously memor- able. The case of Summerville vs. Jackson, tried in 1849, was perhaps the first of that class. It was an action of ejectment to re- cover the possession of about 160 acres of land near Gaysport. The case turned main- ly upon the question of fraud in defendant's acquisition of his title. And the jury found with the plaintiff. The judgment was af- firmed in the supreme court in 1850. Mr. Miles represented the defendant, and Mr. Blair and Mr. Thaddeus Stevens the plain- tiffs. It is said Mr. Blair's triumph in this case secured him his subsequent profes- sional success and eminence as a lawyer. Though Mr. Stevens has acquired his great- est renown since that date, he was then dis- tinguished for great professional ability. The writer, then a boy, remembers the peroration of his argument in this case. As he stood before the jury he was tall and im-

102

HISTORY OF BLAIR COUNTY

posing in his appearance, and his face, though white with impassioned feeling, im- pressed the possession of great intellect. He spoke in low and solemn tones, and he depicted so darkly what he denominated as the fraud in the case that he seemed to bring the jury under the spell of an unnat- ural power and left them terrified and bound.

The case of Rauch vs. Lloyd & Hill was long a familiar case. Little Charley Rauch, a boy of five years of age, crawled un- der defendants' car at the crossing, going for shavings for his mother. While just under the cars, defendants' servants moved the train and his legs were cut off. Mr. Blair and Mr. Banks were their respective counsel. There was long-protracted litigation, both in this and the supreme court, but the case was finally set- tled.

Farrell vs. Lloyd was also long a famous case. It arose upon the question whether there was a resulting trust in the purchase of land, and knowledge by the vender. In the name of Farrell vs. Lloyd and Lloyd vs. Lynch it was tried several times in the court below, and was four times in the supreme court. Messrs. Hall and Neff appeared for Farrell and Lynch; and for Lloyd, Mr. Blair. With the latter gentleman, later other counsel was associated.

Another case was Louden et al. vs. Blair Iron & Coal Co. It was tried three times be- low, and argued twice in the supreme court- the judgment for plaintiff being there first re- versed, and finally affirmed. It was an action of trespass for removing ore from plaintiff's land. The verdict was for about $14,000.

The case involving the largest amount of money was the suit brought by James Gardner for use vs. John Lloyd. The defendant was one of a large number of persons, who had en- tered into a written guaranty that William M. Lloyd, a suspended banker, would comply with the terms of a settlement by extension of time, and pay the creditors certain sums periodically as therein stipulated. The aggregate of these guaranties was $425,000, and the suit against Mr. Lloyd was a test suit. The defense was, true it was, the signers of the paper had offered

to guarantee the faithful performance of the terms of extension entered into by W. M. Lloyd, but there had been no formal accept- ance of the offer by the creditors, and lacking that element of completeness to give it binding efficacy, there could be no recovery.

About two weeks were consumed in the trial. The preparation of the case was one of unparalleled extent. There were over twelve -hundred creditors of Lloyd, and the notices, exhibits and other papers in the case, many of which were printed, numbered over a thou- sand; and all this prodigious labor was per- formed mainly by the late George M. Reade, of Ebensburg. It seemed to suit his indefat- igable nature. Mr. Blair, Mr. Neff and Mr. Baldrige represented the defendant and with Mr. Reade for the plaintiff, were associated the late Mr. Speer, of Huntingdon, Judge Bell and myself. It only remains to be said Judge Dean affirmed the principle invoked by the de- fendant, and so instructed the jury. We car- ried the case to the supreme court, but that tribunal affirmed the judgment.

There have been-other very important suits, among which were actions affecting the inter- ests of the Pennsylvania railroad company, the Wopsononock railroad company, and the city of Altoona. Among the latter was the case of The City vs. Bowman, involving the legality of the passage of an ordinance. It was finally decided against the city, causing a municipal loss of over $200,000. But we will not pursue this branch of our review further.

The legal business of the county has grown with the increase of population. Especially has this been the case during the peroid elaps- ing since Judge Dean's historical address in 1877. Beginning with January of that year and ending with the January term of the cur- rent year (1896), there have been entered suits and judgments 48,514. Of these the largest number was in 1894-3,816. The present practice of monthly return days with the requirements of the new procedure act has greatly facilitated the dispatch of business.

There was no equity practice till 1865. Since that time there have been filed 256 bills,

103

AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS

of which the greatest number-twenty-eight- were filed in 1893. The increased litigation lias compelled longer sessions of court and during the last two years the court has sat about 140 days in each year.

There have been but five judges since the organization of the county. Judge J. S. Black was the first to occupy the bench. He was succeeded by George Taylor and he by John Dean for two consecutive terms. In March, 1892, he was elected a justice of the supreme court and was succeeded in the court by the writer, who served till the election of the pres- ent incumbent, Martin Bell. Mr. Bell was the district attorney from January, 1887, to Jan- uary, 1890.

Since Judge Dean's review of the member- ship of the bar in 1877, there have been sixty- two admissions, of which thirty-four were residents of the county. Since 1877, eighteen members have died.

The question then with the judge was, who had the honor of being the father of the bar? It lay between Banks, Calvin and McMurtrie, but these three prominent names have since disappeared from the roll. It is proper now to determine who is the father of the bar; and by virtue of my position as its latest historian, I may be allowed the right of decision and henceforth, my brethren are lawfully author- ized to award that distinguished recognition to Brother Daniel J. Neff.

Of the original members of the bar in this county, not one survives, unless I except Mr. Coffey, now resident in Washington, D. C. Of the subsequent additions, many moved away. Some never came into prominence, whilst others became conspicuous, either as practitioners or as incumbents of public office.

In March, 1890, Mr. Calvin died, and he was followed by Mr. S. M. Woodcock in Feb- ruary, Mr. H. H. Herr in October, and Mr. S. S. Blair in December of the same year. This was regarded as an unusual mortality. Mr. Banks and Mr. McMurtrie both died in 1880, whilst Mr. Cresswell, their contemporary, died in 1882, and Mr. Brotherline in 1879.

Mr. Hewit died after a very short illness in

March, 1894, and Mr. Baldrige died suddenly in March, 1895.

My predecessor has spoken of the older members who have departed, and we can only make reference to a few of those who have since appeared to take their places.

Both Mr. Hewit and Mr. Baldrige were prominent members of the bar, and enjoyed the public confidence to a large degree.

Mr. Hewit was a gentleman of great polit- ical ambition. He was district attorney for two terms, and was a member of the legisla- ture in 1871, 1879, 1881 and 1893, and speaker of the house in 1881. He was suc- ceeded in his office by his son, Oliver H. Hewit.

L. W. Hall was for many years an active practitioner at this bar, and whilst here was elected to the senate, of which body he was speaker in 1867. He since removed to Harris- burg, where he now resides and practices. He is the resident attorney of the Pennsylvania railroad company in Dauphin county.

J. F. Milliken was colonel of the Fifth regi- ment and district attorney of the county from 1874 to 1877. It was during his term that the extraordinarily large number of prosecutions was brought for violation of the liquor law. The railroad rioters were prosecuted during the last year of his term. He afterwards went to Egypt, but now resides in New York.

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.

Twentieth century history of Altoona and Blair County, Pennsylvania, and representative citizens, Part 14

Author: Sell, Jesse C 1872- Publication date: 1911 Publisher: Chicago, Richmond-Arnold Publishing Number of Pages: 1036

Author: Sell, Jesse C 1872-
Publication date: 1911
Publisher: Chicago, Richmond-Arnold Publishing
Number of Pages: 1036