USA > Washington > Standard history of the city of Washington from a study of the original sources > Part 49
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
East Washington Savings Bank was incorporated under the laws of the District of Columbia in May, 1905. It was organized to meet the demand in that quarter for loans upon approved first mortgages on real estate. M. I. Weller and others were inter- ested in its foundation. The bank is located at 312 Pennsyl- vania Avenue, southeast. M. I. Weller is president.
The Home Savings Bank was incorporated under the laws of Virginia in 1899, and is the second oldest institution of the kind now operating in Washington. The savings feature was made prominent and has held that position, though the bank engages in a constantly increasing commercial business. B. F. Saul is its president.
The North Capitol Savings Bank was organized in the later months of 1912, incorporated under the laws of Arizona, Novem- ber 2, 1912, and went into business at 731 North Capitol Street the following week. The president is Daniel B. Mulcahy.
The Park Savings Bank was organized by business men and residents of Mt. Pleasant who felt the need of a regional bank in that part of the city, and incorporated under the laws of Alabama, and opened for business at Fourteenth Street and Park Road in October, 1909.
The Potomac Savings Bank was established under a cer- tificate of incorporation obtained from the State of Virginia in 1903, with a view to enlarging the banking facilities of George- town.
569
History of the City of Washington
The bank went into business at 1264 Wisconsin Avenue. It moved to 3157 M Street in December, 1905. It entered the new building erected as the permanent home of the bank at the northwest corner of Wisconsin Avenue and M Street, October 1, 1909.
The bank does a general banking business, with the savings feature prominent in its operations.
Seventh Street Savings Bank was incorporated under the laws of West Virginia in July, 1912, and went into business during that month, in a room fitted up for the purpose at the corner of Seventh and N Streets, N. W., for the accommodation of the business interests in that part of Seventh Street and the many residents of the vicinity.
The Union Savings Bank is the oldest of the existing savings banks of the District. It was organized under the laws of West Virginia. At this time the Washington Savings Bank was ab- sorbed. The president is Wade H. Cooper.
The bank practically passed into the hands of the financiers who controlled the National City Bank. Upon the merger of the National City Bank with the Commercial National Bank the financiers of the City Bank remained in control of the Union Savings Bank, which absorbed the Mercantile Bank by purchase of the stock in May, 1912.
The United States Savings Bank was incorporated under the laws of West Virginia in 1906. The institution was organ- ized for the purpose of providing banking facilities at Four- teenth and U Streets.
The Washington Mechanics Savings Bank was incorporated under the laws of Virginia in July, 1906. It was formed to afford a means of deposit and the accumulation of savings for the employees of the United States navy yard and the residents of Southeast Washington.
The Merchants and Mechanics Savings Bank was incor- porated under the laws of Virginia in 1904, with a capital stock of $50,000. Its original site was on G Street near the corner of Seventh. About this time it absorbed the Traders National Bank by purchase, and its main offices were removed to that building.
570
History of the City of Washington
It, with its branches, was absorbed by the United States Trust Company in April, 1912, and was operated as a branch of that institution until November 23, 1913, when that company came under the control of the Munsey Trust Company. On April 4, 1914, it was organized as the Franklin National Bank, with Charles C. Cochran as president.
The McLachlen Banking Corporation, incorporated under the laws of the State of Virginia, in November, 1891, was for many years a private banking establishment, but in 1906, popu- lar subscription to its stock was sought, the institution was placed under the supervision of the Comptroller of the Cur- rency and took on more of the banking character. The bank occupies the first floor of its own building at Tenth and G Streets, N. W., which was rebuilt and refurnished in 1912. The president is A. M. McLachlen, its founder.
The Washington and Southern Bank is a private banking corporation, though under the supervision of the Comptroller of the Currency. The bank was organized in 1912 and went into business in the building formerly occupied by the District National Bank, in April, 1912. It was incorporated under the laws of the State of West Virginia. Its president is J. Selwin Tait.
Banking in the District of Columbia, as it is known today, began with the passage of the National Bank Act, in 1863, amended and extended in 1864. This Act laid the foundation of a national paper currency, which took the place of about 10,000 issues of state, county and private bank issues which had been previously known, and the fluctuating value of which more than anything else precipitated the panic of 1857.
A majority of the banks doing business in the District in 1863 and 1864, took advantage of the provisions of the National Bank Act and incorporated under it. General banks organized since that time have usually incorporated as national banks, and the business in general has gone along under that system. The trust company, formed to meet exigencies in business not pro- vided for in the National Bank Act, and the savings bank, as institutions in Washington, came at a later date.
571
History of the City of Washington
No national bank in Washington has ever been closed by the Comptroller of the Currency, and the few which have liqui- dated have paid their obligations in full. One branch of an outside banking concern and one savings bank only have felt the weight of the authority imposed on the Comptroller within the half century of operations since the passage of the National Bank Act.
The present tendency is toward consolidation and stronger financial institutions. The big institutions are endeavoring to unite the small regional banks under one charter as branch banks. Under the National Banking Act an institution cannot have branches.
CHAPTER XVII
The Bench and Bar
The Act of Congress of July 16, 1790, providing for the establishment of the temporary and permanent seat of govern- ment, left the laws of Maryland and Virginia in force over the territory of these states respectively within the seat of govern- ment until further legislation by Congress. As a consequence, all the litigation arising within the present limits of the District of Columbia from the time of the passage of that law until the passage of the Act of February 27, 1801, creating the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia, was conducted in the courts of Maryland at Annapolis. The records of the Commissioners appointed to establish the seat of government under the Act of 1790, give evidence of a very considerable amount of litiga- tion in which they were involved in their official capacity, both as plaintiffs and as defendants. In most of this litigation they were represented by Philip Barton Key, though accasionally other attorneys were employed.
The Act of Congress of February 27, 1801, divided the District of Columbia into two counties, that on the north of the Potomac River with the islands therein constituting the County of Washington and that on the Virginia side of the City constituting the County of Alexandria, the river in its course through the District being deemed to be within both counties. The Act created a Circuit Court, to consist of a Chief Judge and two Assistant Judges, the court to hold four ses- sions annually in each of the counties created by the Act. An Orphan's Court was created for each of these counties, and provision was made for the transfer of pending litigation in the courts of Maryland and Virginia to the Circuit Court created by the Act. Various statutes amendatory to this Act were from
573
History of the City of Washington
time to time passed by Congress, the most notable of which prior to 1863 was that creating the criminal court in 1838.
By Act approved March 3, 1863, the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia was abolished, and the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia created in its place. This court as originally created consisted of a Chief Justice and three Associate Justices. Any one of these Justices was empowered to hold a Circuit Court or District Court, with an appeal to the entire court en banc, which right of appeal, however, was abolished in 1893, when by Act approved February 9 of that year, the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia was created. A right of appeal from the courts of the District of Columbia to the Supreme Court of the United States has at all times been recognized by various acts of Congress. By the Act creating the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia, appeals to the Supreme Court of the United States were allowed in case involving one hundred dollars. This amount was after- wards raised to one thousand dollars, and is now fixed at five thousand dollars.
Upon the creation of the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia, President Adams tendered the position of Chief Justice to Thomas Johnson, who had been one of the original Commissioners appointed by President Washington for laying out the City, and who had been at different times Chief Justice and Governor of Maryland and an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Mr. Johnson declined the appointment, which was then tendered to and accepted by William Kilty. Judge Kilty was born in London in 1757, and moved at an early age with his parents to Maryland. He served in the Continental Army as a sergeant throughout the Revolu- tionary War, at the close of which he took up the study of law at Annapolis, being soon after delegated by the State to pre- pare a compilation of the laws of Maryland, and his work "Kilty's Laws of Maryland" is at this day the recognized authority on that subject. He resigned his position as Chief Justice of the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia on January 20, 1806, to accept an appointment as Chancellor of
574
History of the City of Washington
Maryland, which position he held until his death on October 10, 1821. While Chancellor of Maryland he prepared, under a commission from the legislature of that state, a compilation of the English statutes in force in Maryland.
Judge Kilty was succeeded as Chief Justice of the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia by Judge William Cranch, who was one of the original Assistant Justices of that Court. Judge Cranch had served for a period of six weeks in 1801 as successor to Alexander White on the board of Commissioners appointed to lay out the city. He held the position of Chief Justice of the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia until his death on September 1, 1855. It is said of him by his biographer that only two cases appealed from him to the Supreme Court of the United States were reversed. He, for some years, in addition to his judicial duties, reported the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States, nine volumes of the reports of that court bearing his name. He also reported the decisions of the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia from 1801 to 1841, in six volumes known as "Cranch's Circuit Court Reports."
Judge Cranch was succeeded on December 7, 1855, by James Dunlop, who filled the position of Chief Justice until the abolishment of the Circuit Court in 1863. Judge Dunlop had previously been the first judge of the Criminal Court upon its organization in 1838, and had been appointed Assistant Justice of the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia in 1845. He was the grandson of Robert Peter, one of the original proprietors of the land on which the City of Washington was laid out. He was graduated at the college of New Jersey at Princeton, had afterwards been associated in partnership with Francis Scott Key and later for some time served as Assistant United States Attorney for the District of Columbia.
The Associate Justices of the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia were James Marshall, appointed March 3, 1801; Nicholas Fitzhugh, appointed November 25, 1803; Allen B. Duckett, appointed March 17, 1806; Buckner Thruston, appointed December 14, 1809. Judge Thruston was born in
575
History of the City of Washington
Virginia and early migrated to Kentucky. He was appointed Federal judge of the Territory of Orleans in 1805, and in the same year was elected one of the original senators from Ken- tucky upon the admission of that state into the Union, which position he held until his appointment as Justice of the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia.
James S. Morsell was appointed Associate Justice January 11, 1815, and held that office until the abolishment of the court - in 1863. He was a native of Calvert County, Maryland, and had practiced law in Georgetown in the early part of the Century and had served in the war of 1812. He died in 1870 at the age of 95 years.
William M. Merrick was appointed December 14, 1855, and continued to be a member of the Court until its abolishment in 1863. Judge Merrick was born in Charles County, Maryland, in 1818 and prior to his appointment had practiced law in Balti- more and Frederick, Md. Upon the abolishment of the Circuit Court of the District, Judge Merrick resumed the practice of law in Maryland, was elected to the Maryland Constitutional Convention in 1867, to the State Legislature of 1870, and to Congress as a member of the forty-second Congress. In 1885 he was appointed by President Cleveland an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia.
The judges of the criminal court created in 1838 were Thomas F. Mason, who served for about one year ; James Dunlop from 1839 to 1845; Thomas Hartley from 1845 to his death.
With the establishment of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia the entire personnel of the judiciary was altered. President Lincoln appointed former Congressman David K. Cartter of Ohio, Chief Justice; George P. Fisher, former Con- gressman and Attorney General of Delaware; Andrew Wylie, of Pennsylvania; and Abraham B. Olin; former Congressman from New York, as Associate Judges.
Judge Cartter filled the position of Chief Justice until his death in 1887. He was succeeded by Edward F. Bingham of Ohio who served until his death in 1903. Judge Bingham was succeeded on April 1, 1903, by Harry M. Clabaugh, formerly
576
History of the City of Washington
one of the Associate Justices of the Court, who held the position until his death on March 6, 1914.
The Associate Justices following the first appointees and the dates of their appointment have been : David C. Humphreys, May 3, 1870; Arthur McArthur, formerly Governor of Wiscos- sin, who re-established the custom of reporting the decisions of the Court, July 15, 1870; Alexander B. Hagner of Maryland, January 21, 1879; Walter S. Cox of the District of Columbia, who was largely instrumental in the preparation of the Code of the District of Columbia, March 1, 1879; Charles P. James, of Ohio, one of the compilers of the Revised Statutes of the United States, July 24, 1879; former Justice of the Circuit Court of the District William M. Merrick, May 1, 1885; Martin V. Mont- gomery of Michigan, formerly Commissioner of Patents, April 1, 1887; Andrew C. Bradley of the District of Columbia, March 23, 1889; Louis E. McComas of Maryland, November 22, 1892; Charles C. Cole of Maine, formerly United States District Attor- ney for the District, January 28, 1893; Harry M. Clabaugh, formerly Attorney General of Maryland, March 2, 1899; Job Barnard of the District of Columbia, October 1, 1899; Thomas H. Anderson of Ohio, formerly United States District Attorney of the District, April 23, 1901; Ashley M. Gould of Maryland, formerly United States District Attorney for the District, December 8, 1902; Jeter C. Pritchard, formerly United States Senator from North Carolina, April 1, 1903; Daniel Thew Wright of Ohio, November 17, 1903; Wendell Phillips Stafford of Vermont, June 1, 1904.
The Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia was created by Act of Congress approved February 9, 1893.
Richard H. Alvey, formerly Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals of Maryland, was appointed Chief Justice April 15, 1893. He retired in December, 1904. The original Associate Judges were Martin F. Morris of the District of Columbia, who retired in June, 1905, and Seth Shepard of Texas, who was appointed Chief Justice on January 5, 1905.
Charles H. Duell, of New York, formerly Commissioner of Patents, was appointed Associate Justice on January 5, 1905,
577
History of the City of Washington
and resigned in August, 1906. Louis E. McComas, formerly Associate Justice of the District Supreme Court and later United States Senate or from Maryland, was appointed Associate Justice on April 26, 1905, and served until his death in November 10, 1907. The present Associate Justices are Charles H. Robb of Vermont, appointed October 5, 1906, and Josiah A. Van Orsdell of Wyoming, appointed December 12, 1907.
Owing to the large number of public officials residing at Washington, the courts of the District have naturally been the scene of many trials of nation-wide interest. Among these have been a considerable number of a criminal character. Among the early cases of this nature was the trial of Richard Lawrence for an attack made by him upon President Andrew Jackson on January 30, 1835, while the President was coming out of the rotunda of the Capitol from attendance at the funeral of Con- gressman Warren R. Davis. The case came on to trial before Judge Cranch on April 11, 1835, and resulted in an acquittal on the ground of insanity. The evidence established the fact that the defendant was laboring under a hallucination to the effect that he was the King of England and of the United States and that President Jackson was a usurper who prevented the defend- ant from exercising his right of kingship.
In December, 1836, Richard H. White was tried for setting fire to the Treasury Building on March 30, 1833. His indict- ment was dated March 30, 1836. His defense was based upon the plea of two years limitations provided for in the act govern- ing the crime, the chief issue at the trial being whether the defendant came without the scope of this limitation by virtue of being a fugitive from justice. At the first trial and at the second trial in April 1837 the jury disagreed, but at the third trial in June, 1837, the defendant was acquitted on the plea of limitations.
The trial of Dr. George A. Gardiner in 1853 attracted great prominence throughout the country. Gardiner had presented evidence before the commission provided for by the treaty of peace with Mexico to adjust claims of American citizens against the Mexican Government, and had been awarded $428,000 by the
578
History of the City of Washington
commission on account of the alleged destruction of a mine which he claimed to have owned in the State of San Louis Potosi. Gardiner was prosecuted on the charge of perjury in the estab- lishment of this claim. The first trial resulted in a disagreement, after which Mr. Henry May who had assisted the District Attorney, Philip R. Fendall, in the trial of the case, went to Mexico and procured additional evidence in the shape of a letter to Gardiner from his brother, which practically established the guilt of the defendant beyond dispute. When the jury returned with a verdict of guilty, the defendant took something from his vest pocket, placed it in his mouth and called for a drink of water. Almost immediately, he fell. Although denying that he had taken poison he died within an hour. He had frequently stated that he would never serve sentence in case of conviction.
Probably the most notable trial of the first half century was that of Congressman Daniel E. Sickles, afterwards General Sickles, for the killing of Philip Barton Key, at the time United States Attorney for the District of Columbia. Key had for a long time been intimate with the wife of Congressman Sickles, who had secured a confession from his wife and had frequently warned Key against continuing his relations with her. On February 27, 1859, seeing a handkerchief signal pass between Key and his wife, Sickles shot Key on Lafayette Place near the corner of Pennsylvania Avenue. Key died on the 7th of March following. The case was tried before Judge Crawford of the Criminal Court and was prosecuted by Robert Ould, who had been appointed by the President to succeed Key as United States Attorney for the District. Sickles was represented by Edwin M. Stanton, afterwards Secretary of War under President Lin- coln, by Chilton and Magruder and by Daniel Radcliffe. The case was famous as an early instance of the adoption of the defense of the "unwritten law," upon which ground the jury rendered a verdict of not guilty.
The damage suit brought by Hallet Kilbourn against Ser- geant at Arms John G. Thompson of the House of Representa- tives in 1876, resulted from the commitment of Kilbourn by Thompson, under resolution of the House, to the district jail
579
History of the City of Washington
for contempt in refusing to appear before a committee of the House of Representatives to testify concerning certain matters growing out of the failure of J. Cooke & Co. Judge Cartter issued a writ of habeas corpus, and after three days' argument in the House that body by a vote of 165 to 75 directed the Sergeant at Arms to obey the writ. Kilbourn was discharged by Judge Cartter and soon after brought suit against Thompson and others for false imprisonment. A decision by the Supreme. Court of the District, upon demurrer denying the right of action, was reversed by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1881. The first trial in April, 1882, before Judge McArthur resulted in a verdict of $100,000, which was set aside by the judge as excessive. A second trial occurred in November, 1883, before Judge Cox, and resulted in a verdict of $60,000, which the Judge set aside as excessive. The third trial in March, 1884, before Judge Hagner, resulted in a verdict of $37,500, which the Judge reduced to $20,000, which sum with interest was appropriated by Congress on March 4, 1885. Kilbourn was represented in this litigation by Judge J. S. Black; Matthew H. Carpenter; General N. L. Jeffries; Honorable D. W. Voor- hees; Enoch Totten; C. A. Eldridge; and W. D. Davidge. The government was represented at different stages by S. S. Shella- barger; Judge William Merrick; W. H. Trescott; H. W. Garnett; Honorable Frank Hurd; Walter E. Smith; District Attorney George B. Corkhill; Assistant District Attorney Coyle; District Attorney Worthington ; and the firm of Shellabarger and Wilson.
On November 14, 1881, Charles J. Guiteau was brought to trial for the murder of President Garfield in the Baltimore and Potomac Railroad depot in Washington on July 2, 1881, the President having died as the result of the shots inflicted by Guiteau on September 19 following. An interesting point as to the jurisdiction of the court to try the case arose by reason of the fact that the President had died in New Jersey. It was held that the court had jurisdiction of the case, regardless of the place where death took place, because of the fact that the act constituting the crime had been committed within the Dis- trict. The further defense was interposed that the death of
580
History of the City of Washington
the President had resulted not from the necessarily fatal con- sequence of the shots inflicted, but as the result of malpractice on the part of the physicians who attended him. The chief defense relied upon, however, was that of insanity, on the ground that the defendant acted under the belief that he was doing the will of God in destroying the President. The case was prosecuted by District Attorney George B. Corkhill, the Govern- ment being represented by Judge Porter of New York and Walter D. Davidge of Washington. The defendant was repre- sented by George Scoville and Charles Reed of Chicago. The case was tried before Judge Cox, who allowed the utmost lati- tude to the defence in the introduction of evidence tending to show the insanity of the defendant. The trial lasted until Janu- ary 20, 1882, when the jury brought in a verdict of guilty.
The Potomac Flats cases, technically referred to as Morris vs. United States, grew out of the Act of Congress of August 2, 1882, providing for the improvement of navigation of the Potomac River, the establishing of harbor lines, and the raising of the flats in the river opposite the city of Washington, and an Act approved August 5, 1886, which directed the Attorney General to institute a suit against all claimants to the land or water affected by the improvements provided for in the former Act, "for the purpose of establishing and making clear the right of the United States thereto." By the latter act the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia was vested with jurisdiction to determine all questions of title, and to annul or confirm all claims, arising or set forth in connection with the suit.
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.