Twentieth century history of Altoona and Blair County, Pennsylvania, and representative citizens, Part 6

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 6

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).

"Of the cases tried and suits entered in the thirty years since the organization of the county, when compared with the population the aggregate seems enormous. In the common pleas, including judgment bills, appeals, cer- tioraris, there have been 39,205 cases; in the quarter session, 2,619; in the oyer and ter- miner, ninety-nine; making altogether 41,923. In this are not included the large number of es- tates partitioned or appraised in the orphans' court, nor the trust accounts of assignees and other trustees settled in the common pleas. There have passed through the orphans' court, for confirmation and allowance, 1,770 accounts of executors and administrators, many of them involving protracted litigation before auditors and on exceptions to auditors' reports.

"Judge Black took forty-four verdicts, Judge Taylor 878, and there have been taken since 495. Of course this, as every lawyer knows, does not show the extent of actual work done in the trial of causes, for many of them, after hours and sometimes days of trial, 'go off,' either by non-suit or settlement of parties.

"By the act of assembly erecting the county all undetermined issues between parties resi- dent on the territory out of which it was formed were to be transferred to the records of the new county.

HISTORY OF BLAIR COUNTY

"The first suit in the common pleas is one to No. 43, August term, 1826, of Huntingdon county, transferred. It is an action of debt by John Wilson and Rachel Buchanan, executors of Dr. John Buchanan, deceased, against Will- iam Smith, executor of John Steel, deceased. When it was brought, in 1826, Judges Burn- side, Adamas and McCune were on the bench in Huntingdon county. Smith is marked attor- ney for plaintiffs, and Allison and Steel for de- fendants. As appears from the record, more than seventy continuances were marked during the twenty years it stood on the Huntingdon county docket, and five after its transfer to Blair. It was then stricken from the record, under a rule of Judge Black's 'because not moved in by either party for one whole year.' This after so long a life, was a most 'lame and impotent conclusion.' One feature worthy of attention, however, is that, after pending all these years in the courts of the two counties, the entire bill of costs taxed is only $21.63, of which amount the sheriff gets $2.65, and the prothonotary $8.65.

"The first case brought originally in this county is a libel in divorce; subpoena issued June 23, 1846, by Mary Armstrong against her husband, John Armstrong. T. J. Coffey is at- torney for libelant. John Cox, Esq., was ap- pointed commissioner to take testimony, and a divorce was decreed thereon by Judge Black, the 25th day of March, 1847. The entire costs were $7.75. Divorces have become more costly since.

"In the first year of the court 661 cases were entered in the common pleas, including original writs, certioraris, and appeals. In 1856, ten years later, 1,090; in 1866, 1,100; and in 1876, 2,717. Many of the cases included in this last number are judgments on building association bonds, but still the natural increase in legal business the last ten years has been much greater than in any preceding ten years.

"Since the organization of the county many important cases, both civil and criminal have been tried, and in a number of them writs of error were taken, and they were reviewed by the supreme court."

ADDITION BUILT TO COURT HOUSE.

With the advance of time and the increase of legal and official business it was found that the grand and commodious court house was inadequate to meet the demands and preserve the records and steps were taken for its en- largement. After some legal preliminaries it was finally decided to build an extension which in all essential details should correspond with the old part, and the contract was awarded to W. V. Hughes & Son, of Holli- daysburg, who commenced work in 1906. The original contract price was $106,500, but dur- ing the progress of the building operations the commissioners planned some rather extensive changes in the old part, and installed new steel furniture, marble wainscoting, decorations, paintings, heating apparatus and fire-proof safes, so that the entire cost footed up $236,- 816.50. This, added to the cost of the old part, gives to Blair county a court house cost- ing nearly a half million dollars.

The new addition contains on its different floors, a new court room, library, lawyers' lobby, judges' room, consultation rooms, grand jury room, district attorney's office, rooms for women, three toilet rooms, and two large rooms for register and recorder and prothon- otary.

Blair county's court house as it now stands is beautifully and substantially constructed, convenient and comfortable in its arrangement and ranks among the finest in the state.

The reconstructed temple of justice was dedicated with befitting ceremonies on October 4, 1907. The imposing edifice, which is a credit to the county of Blair and its people, to- gether with its luxurious furnishings and mag- nificent equipments, was viewed during the day with great admiration by the multitude that attended the ceremonies.

Preliminary to opening the services a bar meeting was held and President Judge Martin Bell appointed A. A. Stevens, Esq., president of the general committee to preside at the ded- icatory meeting, and the official court stenog- rapher J. Foster Meek, Esq., and Miss Gertrude Shields were chosen as secretaries.

AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS

Court Crier James S. Plummer then ad- journed the court and Chairman Stevens as- sumed charge of the dedicatory services. He called on Dr. J. H. Mathers, of Bellwood, to invoke divine blessing on the assemblage, after which Mr. Stevens delivered the address of welcome which embraced a statement of the cost and expenses incurred by remodeling of the court house, and he emphasized the fact

Hon. D. J. Neff, the dean of the Blair county bar, was next introduced and delivered the address on the judiciary of the court.

Chairman Stevens called on Hon. Francis J. O'Connor, president judge of Cambria county, to say a few words.

During the course of his remarks he con- gratulated the people of the county, and those who had to do with the reconstruction of the edifice, on having such a complete building. He said also that next in importance to a ca- thedral dedication to the service of God, is the dedication of a temple of justice.

A. V. Dively said that he hoped that it could be said of the present reconstructed, magnifi- cent court house as it was said at the dedica- tion of the original building that not one stone had been laid in the walls with the taint of graft.

Brief addresses were made by T. C. Hare, Esq., Hon. J. D. Hicks, the latter said that he had watched the construction of the court house with considerable interest, and I am free to say that I don't take any stock in the alleged graft.

Hon. J. Lee Plummer said that a judicial investigation of this alleged graft, and the matter should be presented to the grand jury for investigation. The Altoona newspapers have been silent as to this dedication, and one newspaper charges graft. For my part I do not think there has been any graft on this

work. I suggest that these contracts be sub- mitted to the grand jury next week.

James H. Craig said that as far as the Ga- zette was concerned it has always favored the remodeling of the court house.

Among the distinguished visitors were Hon. Francis J. O'Connor, J. P. Martin, Esq., Ellis G. Kerr, all of Cambria county.

The exercises closed at 12:25. Chairman that the total cost approximates the sum of . Stevens announced that the court house would $242,000. President Stevens at the conclusion be open the remainder of the day for the in- spection of visitors. of his address introduced Judge Martin Bell, who delivered the historical address, wherein The historical address was made by Judge Martin Bell, who spoke as follows: he reviewed the Blair county courts from its inception in 1864 down to the present day.

In 1877, at the dedication of this court house, Honorable John Dean, then president judge, afterwards justice of the supreme court, delivered an address covering the his- tory of the bench and bar of Blair county from the date of the formation of the county down to the time of said address. In 1896, at the semi-centennial of the county. Honorable Aug. S. Landis delivered an address, follow- ing in general the lines laid down by Judge Dean and covering the period from 1877 to 1896. In the present address an attempt will be made to follow in the footsteps of my said illustrious predecessors and my desire will be to supplement their labors by bringing down the legal history of Blair county from 1896 to 1907.

PRESIDENT JUDGES.

To the dean of this bar, the Hon. D. J. Neff has been assigned the duty of preparing an ad- dress on the judiciary of Blair county. Any attempt on my part to elaborately review the history of the bench would therefore be ill- timed. But I know that Mr. Neff will pardon me if brief mention is made of some of the im- pressions left on my mind by Judges Dean and Landis. Judge Dean was a man of remark- able ability. Quick to decide, with a clear and penetrating voice and a remarkably handsome presence he made a model trial judge. His mental methods, or processes, were orderly, accurate and logical. His vocabulary of words was extensive, his diction apt and emphatic,

HISTORY OF BLAIR COUNTY

and he had the happy faculty of expressing his ideas concisely and at the same time forci- bly. It is not surprising then that many of his oral extemporaneous charges are models of elegant and forcible English, sound in their in- terpretation of the law and clear in their state- ment of facts.

But while he was president judge of this district Judge Dean wrote but few elaborate opinions. His decisions were in the form, generally, of Per Curiams in the Bench Book. We who knew him as a president judge were rather amused at the time of his first opinion handed down after he went on the supreme bench: Fisher v. King, 153 Pa. 5. In that opinion he roundly scores the court below for disposing of a rule to open a judgment with the mere decree, " rule discharged."

But Judge Dean while sitting as a supreme justice was most painstaking and careful in preparing and writing his opinions. He never acquired the art of dictating but pen in hand worked out his decisions. And his labor was not in vain. His opinions are unsurpassed for clearness of statement, cogency of reasoning and elegance of diction, and are in every re- spect worthy of place with the decisions of Gibson, Black, Sharswood and other eminent jurists who have adorned the supreme bench of our state. As Mr. Chief Justice Mitchell said at the bar meeting held at the death of Judge Dean: "Hon. Judge Dean gave the best he had to Pennsylvania and Judge Dean's best could not be excelled by any one else in the state."

Hon. Aug. S. Landis, who succeeded Judge Dean as president judge, was a gentleman in appearance, in manner, in word and conduct. but, although most dignified in manner, he had a kind heart and an ear ever ready to hear. When I began to read law in 1871, Judge Landis was forging to the front as an attor- ney. Messrs. Calvin and Banks were gradu- ally retiring from practice. Samuel S. Blair was at his zenith as a lawyer and an advocate and in a few years Judge Landis was pitted against Mr. Blair in almost every important case tried at this bar. As a lawyer he was in-

dustrious, careful and learned; as an advocate he was earnest, logical, forceful and convinc- ing.

One of the ablest legal arguments I ever lis- tened to was that made by Judge Landis in the lower court in Gardner v. Lloyd, 110 Pa. 279. His argument far outclassed that of Hon. R. Milton Speer (on the same side for plaintiff), a most learned lawyer and eloquent advocate, and the reply by Mr. Blair, for defendant, was by no means as forceful and convincing. I was junior counsel for plaintiff and tried hard to have Judge Landis assigned the duty of arguing our side in the supreme court. But my advice was not heeded; we lost our case; it was a very close one; had Judge Landis re- peated the magnificent argument he made in the lower court we might have won in the ap- pellate court.

DECEASED LAWYERS.

Hon. George H. Spang. Mr. Spang was a native of Blair county but commenced practic- ing law in Bedford, where he was one of the leaders of a bar composed of such able lawyers as Hon. John Cessna and others. He came to Blair county about 1884 and at once acquired an extensive practice. His knowledge of the law was wide and accurate. He was most painstaking in his practice. It would be well if some of the younger lawyers, and the older ones as well, would use the care. Mr. Spang did in preparing papers in the orphan's court. He had acquired his habits of practice before the days of stenographers and type writers, but for accuracy and care in preparing his papers could not be surpassed. He was a most eloquent and fluent speaker, but had been trained in the old school of trial practice when unlimited time was given an advocate in ad- dressing the jury, and it seemed almost impos- sible for him to compress his speech into a half hour's time. Moreover, he had acquired the habit of writing down all the testimony and no amount of "prodding" on the part of the court could induce him to drop this method.

George B. Bowers, Esq. Mr. Bowers was born and raised in Blair county, although

AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS

shortly after his admission to the bar, he prac- ticed for a few years at Everett, Bedford county. Returning to Altoona he spent the balance of his life there. For a time he was mainly an office lawyer, but after he was elected city solicitor of Altoona he participated with marked ability in many important court trials. We will ever remember his smile, his pleasant voice and his kindly manner. He was full of the milk of human kindness.

John K. Patterson, Esq. Mr. Patterson commenced the study of the law in my office at Hollidaysburg, but finished his course under N: P. Mervine, Esq., in Altoona, with whom after his admission, he was junior partner. Afterwards he was senior partner in the firm of Patterson & Hare, the junior partner being the present city solicitor, Thomas C. Hare, Esq. Mr. Patterson represented the county in the general assembly at Harrisburg, but was defeated for re-election by one of the reform waves which swept over the state. While not a profound lawyer, he had a vein of hard, shrewd common sense, which made a most valuable counsellor in matters of business con- cern.

J. Horace Smith, Esq. Mr. Smith was born in Scotch Valley, Frankstown township; his parents being descendants of the early settlers. He read law with H. M. Baldrige, Esq., de- ceased. He was a hard working, industrious, honest and promising young lawyer when pneumonia claimed him for its victim.

G. Lloyd Owens, Esq. Mr. Owens was born in Birmingham, Huntingdon county. His professional career was spent in Tyrone, where for many years he was junior partner in the firm of Stevens & Owens, afterwards Stevens, Owens & Pascoe. His practice was principally that of an office lawyer.

John D: Blair, Esq. Mr. Blair was the son of Samuel S. Blair, Esq., deceased, for many years the acknowledged leader of this bar. The younger Mr. Blair received a most liberal education at Princeton and in Europe. His father died in 1890 and the son ever after- wards until his death in 1906 occupied the old office. Gentlemanly in appearance, speech and

deportment, he was universally esteemed and respected. He was a forcible and eloquent speaker and his knowledge of the law was ac- curate and extensive. Poor health and a lack of the stimulus, which necessity to earn a live- lihood affords, also prevented him from taking rank as one of the ablest lawyers Blair county ever produced.

John A. Doyle, Esq. Mr. Doyle was buried by his sorrowing friends but a few weeks ago. His specialty was building and loan associa- tion practice, in which he was an expert.

COUNTY OFFICIALS.

This county ever since its organization has been blessed with most competent prothono- taries. Fifty years ago Jos. Baldrige was prothonotary. He was the soul of honesty, and quietly, but most efficiently, discharged the duties of the various offices which he filled. For many years prior to his death he was clerk to the county commissioners. Mr. Baldrige was succeeded by A. S. Morrow, Esq., who for many years was a most efficient officer, al- though during the last few years of his term, he became somewhat lazy and careless. Well do some of us remember the old prothono- tary's office at or about the close of Mr. Mor- row's administration. It occupied the relative space now taken up by the office of the county commissioners. Entering the door you came . first on a brick pavement ; then up a short step and you were on a board platform or floor; back of this was a brick vault. On the board floor were high tables; any one desiring to write stood up. Then there were three or four big tables on which were piled most of the papers belonging to the office in an apparent state of hopeless confusion, but Mr. Morrow seemed intuitively to know just where to dive into the pile for the required papers. The pro- thonotaries since Mr. Morrow have been James P. Stewart, Charles Geesey, Esq., J. L. Hart- man and H. E. Ferguson.

One sheriff has died while in office during the last ten years, namely, G. T. Bell, who died in 1906. He was no relative of mine, al- though sometimes when running for office I

HISTORY OF BLAIR COUNTY

received votes on the theory that he was either my brother or my cousin. Quiet in manner and speech, Sheriff Bell, by reason of his fair- ness and kindness of heart, had a wonderful hold on the voters of Blair county and was elected sheriff three times.

Of the many other officials who have faith- fully performed their work time will suffice for the mention of but two.

C. D. Bowers was deputy prothonotary for the period of nearly fifty years. He was a most honest and conscientious man and never willingly wronged any one. He was overly careful in the performance of his work and was almost morbidly fearful lest a mistake be made. He had somehow or somewhere caught the idea that the record must show just the ex- act minute the court convened. Despite all I could tell him as to this being unnecessary, that the court was supposed to convene at 9 o'clock, he would invariably get out his watch (a present from the bar) and with exactness even to the quarter of a minute note down just how tardy the president judge was. Mr. Bowers died at his post; while at work in the office a sudden pain struck him and in a mo- ment he had passed to what was for him most certainly the better land.

Wm. H. Westover. Mr. Westover was janitor of the court house from its dedication in 1877 until his death in 1906. We all know how faithful he was in the performance of his duties. In cold weather he would remain on duty all night firing the heaters, and it seemed to be his pride to look after and care for the court house.

In C. D. Bowers and W. H. Westover, Blair county had two model officials. Con- tented with their lot and aspiring not for pro- motion but only for efficiency, their record is a proud one. So long as we have such as they among us no one can say that this is a wholly wicked world and that all men are selfishly and graspingly striving to climb up the ladder by trampling down their fellows.

In his address Judge Dean states that, in- cluding judgments, 39,205 suits had been brought from the formation of the county un-

til 1877. Judge Landis in his speech says that in the nineteen years from 1877 to 1896, 48,514 suits were brought. I take it that he means suits and judgments combined. Neither of said gentlemen separate suits from judg- ments. From 1896 until the present time 27,866 suits have been commenced; this aggre- gate includes 15,738 judgments entered. It will be observed that apparently the legal busi- ness in the prothonotary's office has grown but little in the past ten years. But such ap- pearance results largely from the fact that fewer judgment notes are now entered than was the case some thirty years ago. It was then the custom for building and loan associa- tions and other lenders of money to take as security therefor judgment notes, which were entered in the prothonotary's office. But about 1876, in an ejectment suit, Building and Loan Association vs. Stains, Mr. Blair for defend- ant contended that a lender of money who re- lies on a judgment alone was not protected by the recording acts; that to obtain the benefit of such protection the lender must take a mort- gage; the judgment creditor was supposed to rely for the collection of his debt on the per- sonal property of the debtor, and the fact that the judgment was entered barred or cut out no equities as to real estate. In that case the title to the lot was in the name of Mr. Stains, but his wife proved that her money paid for the purchase of the land, and that her husband had promised to have the deed made in her name. Notice to this effect was given prior to the sheriff's sale. Judge Dean sustained the contention of Mr. Blair and the building and loan association lost their money. After the trial of said suit associations and many other money lenders abandoned the former practice of taking judgment notes as security and re- quired of their debtors the giving of mort- gages.

The result was that fewer judgments were entered in the prothonotary's office, but the business of the recorder of deeds was largely increased. From 1846 to 1877 but six books had been required for the recording of mort- gages. From 1877 to 1896 forty-seven books

AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS

were filled. From 1896 down to the present date sixty-seven of said books have been re- quired. Up to 1877 but thirty-six deed books were filled; from 1877 to 1896 seventy-four deed books were required, and since 1896 sixty-six additional books have been used in the recording of deeds.

From 1896 to the present time 489 verdicts in civil cases have been taken, and judgments have been confessed on 298 cases which were on the trial list. In addition there have been a number of discontinuances entered, but I am unable to give the exact data as to how many of the cases discontinued were on the trial list.

As Judge Dean said in his address: "Of course this, as every lawyer knows, does not show the extent of actual work done in the trial of cases for many of them after hours and sometimes days of trial 'go off' either by non-suit or settlement of the parties."

Under the rules of court 4,864 judgments have been taken for want of appearance or for want of an affidavit of defense. It will be ob- served that the foregoing figures as to cases disposed of falls far short of the aggregate of suits brought. The remaining cases may be styled unaccounted for. Many suits are brought with no intention of ever putting them on the trial list. Many others are lost sight of by the litigants or their counsel. Only a little over one hundred cases were put down for this fall's trial list. Said cases so placed on the trial list may be taken to fairly repre- sent the number of cases which are now open and ready for trial.

During the same period, to-wit, from 1896 to the present time, 312 divorces have been granted. This large increase in the number of divorces applied for and granted is worthy of note on the part of our lawmakers. Speaking for myself I would amend our statutes so that absolute divorces would only be granted on the ground of adultery or for some very grave reason. If husband and wife cannot live to- gether let them live apart, but do not allow them to remarry.

The business of our argument courts in- creased during the last ten years, but owing to

the fact that we have an argument court al- most every Monday morning, at which mat- ters are disposed of, it is impossible to give any data approximating accuracy on this branch of legal business.

The character of trial litigation in the civil courts has greatly changed in the last fifty years. Then ejectment suits, involving the original location of tracts of land, were com- mon. In Blair county, since I have been on the bench, I recall but one such trial-Stiffler v. Calvin. But damage suits growing out of falls on pavements, and trolley accidents are numerous. The telephone and similar elec- trical problems and discoveries likewise are a fruitful source of worriment to the modern court. For a number of years in Blair county much time was taken up in disposing of litiga- tion between the contractor and the owner of the new house. Moreover, for some reason this court has been greatly burdened with mu- nicipal litigation growing out of the affairs of the city of Altoona, and we have been called on to interpret and pass upon almost every section of the act of 1889 applying to cities of the third class.

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 6

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