Randolph County, Indiana - Chapter 14: Bench and Bar, 1914

The memory of the Hfe and work of a lawyer to a great degree passes away with his generation; our great judges are soon forgotten, and their names and work are preserved only in the pages of dry and musty reports of v.hich the average man knows, and cares nothing. The very nature of the work of the lawyer and the jurist insures its speedy oblivion in the midst of the more spectacular achievements of the soldier, the executive, the inventor, the author and the statesman. Sow many of the citizens of our county caiL name a half dozen of the early judges and lawyers who were prominent in our county history? And 'yet they were men famous in their day, looked upon with Something akin to awe by the rough makers of our pioneer civilization.

This chapter is written with a desire to do some measure of justice to the men who made the early legal history of the county and whose inem,ories are rapidly fading, even among the members of the profession, and to preserve in a permanent form something of the work of our modern bench and bar which is equally as sure of oblivion in the near future. That this desire will be satisfactorily fulfilled is not even hoped, but we trust that we may be able to set forth in this chapter some information that will make ' it of value to both the legal profession and the public generally.

Indiana became a state in 1816, and Randolph county was formed during the legislature of 181 7-18 18, held at Corydon. It was carved out of Wayne county, which had been formed in 1810, and its boundaries were described as beginning at the intersection of the Ohio state line with the line townships 16 and 17, thence westward to the old boundary, thence westward with the center line of the i8th township to the Indiana boundary, thence northward on the Indiana bouncfary to the Ohio line and thence south to the beginning, thus including all the territory north of Wayne county and east and south of the twelve-mile boundary. It was afterward changed for judicial purposes and contained at one time, the area now occupied by the counties of Delaware, Grant, Jay, Adams, Blackford, Wells and Allen, and an indefinite area, in which no county had then been organized,

SO that it is quite possible that at one time the courts of Randolph county had jurisdiction as far north as the present southern boundiary of Michigan. Wirichester was the county-seat from the first, being laid out in 1818, before either Indianapolis or Fort Wayne was established. The first court house was 18x24 feet,. two stories high, and of hewn logs and the jail was a similar structure, to which entrance was gained by a ladder. The, Hon. O. H. Smith, in his "Early Indiana Trials," gives an interesting description of the typical court room of that day. "The building," he says, "generally contained two rooms, - ^the court roofti being the largest, - -at one end of which there was a platform elevated some three feet high, for the judges, with a long bench to seat them. These benches were very substantial in general, sufficient to sustain the most weighty judges. The bar had its benches near the table of the clerk, and the crowd was kept back by a long pole fastened with withes at the ends."

The state wels divided into judicial circuits, each composed of a number of counties, and each presided over by the circuit, or as he was then called, the president judge. These judges moved about from one county to another in their circuits, holding court at the various county-seats, and Randolph was in the third judicial circuit. The president judges were appointed by the legislature and were invariably men well versed with the law, but the most interesting feature of our early judicial organization was the system of associate judges. Two associate judges were elected in each county by the people, and no legal knowledge was required of them; they sat with the president judge and each of them had equal power with him, a power which they often exercised in overruling his decision. The associates often carried on the business of the court in the. absence of the president judge," the records often showing that after important cases had been disposed of he left the bench and they proceeded to the end of the term, ruling on pleadings, the -meaning of which they had not the slightest idea. The average lawyer of those days was a man learned not only in the substance of the law, but also in its highly technical language, and the associates were often compelled to appeal to them to learn the meaning of terms used in the arguments and pleadings. Many of our early lawyers were men educated in eastern universities, who brought with them much of culture and refinement entirely foreign to our rude frontiersmen; they were looked upon as professional men indeed, invariably being the leaders of social and intellectual life of the community. The country was largely virgin forest and the population hardy and rough, and generally reckless. This latter characteristic is amply illus^ trated by the pages of the early court order books, on which a great amount of space is devoted to indictments for affray, riot, and assault and battery

The members of our present bar may find it hard to picture in their minds the practice of law under such conditions. The lawyers often traveled about the circuit with the president judge, riding horseback through the forests, fording streams and putting up at rough country taverns, and in spite of the scholastic atmosphere which surrounded the practice of law, it was not a sedentary pursuit by any means and its followers were apt to become physically hardy and vigorous like the people among whom they lived.

Mr. Smith gives an interesting picture of the early court days. "The 'crowds' at that day thought the holding of a court a great afifair. The people came hundreds of miles to see the judges, and hear the lawyers 'plead' as they called it. On one occasion there came to be tried before the jury an indictment for an assault and battery against a man for pulling the of another who had insulted him. The court room was filled to suffocation. The two associate judges were on the bench. The evidence had been heard and public expectation was on tip-toe. All was silent as death, when my young friend, then 'squire', afterward Judge Charles H. Test, rose and addressed the court : 'If the court please.' He was here interrupted by Judge Winchell from the bench : 'Yes, we do please ; go to the bottom of the case, young man. The people have come in to hear the lawyers plead.' The young squire, encouraged by the kind response of the judge, proceeded to address the jury some three hours in excited eloquence upon the great provocation his client had received to induce his docile nature to bound over all legal barriers, and take the prosecutor by the nose. All eyes were upon him, and as he closed, Judge Winchell roared out, 'Capital ; I did not think it was in him!' The jury returned a verdict of not guilty amid the rapturous applause of the audience. Court adjourned, and the people returned home to tell their children that they had heard the lawyers 'plead.' "

It may be noted that until the constitution of 185 1 the common law of England was largely the law of our state, and that the library of the average"backwoods" lawyer consisted generally of a work on common law pleading, the few Indiana statutes then in force and the volumes of Blackford's reports, all of which were easily carried from place to place.

of the circuit court until 1829, when the legislature created probate courts. In 1 83 1 a separate probate court was established for each county, presided over by a single judge, and this situation continued until 1852, when the court was abolished by the legislature. No separate court of chancery ever sat in Randolph county, and no circuit court has always exercised chancery jurisdiction. The English chancery forms were universally used until 1852, when distinctions between law and equity were abolished, and since which time there has been no distinct chancery side of our circuit courts. In 1852 the same legislature which abolished the probate courts created a court of common pleas for each county in the state, presided over by a separate judge, and Randolph county had a common pleas court until it was abolished in 1873. The common pleas court had jurisdiction of all matters formerly taken charge of by the probate courts, and. in addition could try all cases except for libel, slander, breach of marriage contract, action on official bond, actions involving title to real estate and actions involving more than $1,000, the circuit court having exclusi\'e jurisdiction of all such excepted actions.

Except in certain classes of cases, specifically designated by statute, which are tried before justices of the peace, mayors of cities, and county commissioners, all legal practice in Randolph county is now confined to the circuit court.

The first court held in Randolph county was on October 12, 1818, at the house of William Way, before William Edwards and John Wright, associate judges. The first action of the court was to admit James Rariden to the bar and appoint him prosecuting attorney. A grand jury was empanelled, retired and returned to report no indictments; the grand jury was discharged and court adjourned. Chai-les Conway was clerk of the court, and sessions were held at his house until the court house was built. Court sat but once in 1818 and twice in 1819, and at the September term, 1819, John Watts, the president judge of the circuit, presided. That our sturdy pioneers were not slow in airing their domestic difficulties in court is evidenced by the fact ' that a bill for divorce was filed at the June term, 1820; the bill was evidently defective, however, as it was dismissed on a demurrer filed by prosecutor Rariden, who received an allowance of $10.00 for his services. The prosecutor was allowed $12.00 per term, and the associate judges $2.00 a day, for their services at this time. In October, 1820, court met at the court house for the first time, and in October, 1821, the Hon. Miles C. Eggleston, of whom O. H. Smith has written many interesting anecdotes, sat as president judge. The first indictment returned, was in October, 1820, and was, as might be expected, for an affray, and in April, 1822, six indictments for assault and battery were returned. The records show that an indictment was returned against Henry Smith and Jesse Gray for murder, and this case gtood on the docket until February, 1825, when it was nolle prossed.

At this time the business of the court consisted largely of actions on the case, civil and criminal trespass, assault and battery, riot and affray, and the charlcery side of the court was occupied by actions concerning real estate where publication of notice to non-residents was ordered. It is interestmg that all publications went to the Richmond Weekly Intelligencer, there being po newspaper in Randolph county. Fort Wayne, then a village of two hundred inhabitants, was in Randolph county at that time and one Alexander Ewing was licensed in this court to keep a tavern in Fort Wayne. At the February term, 1825, Oliver H. Smith (the author of "Early Indiana Trials"), produced his commission and was sworn in as prosecuting attorney of the third judicial district. Charles H. Test, who afterward became judge, was sworn in as prosecutor in August, 1827.

At the February term, 1832, with judge Charles H. Test presiding, and William Edwards and John Wright still serving as associates, rules of court were adopted, some of which are so interesting as to require mention here.

Rule 2 provides that it shall be "the duty of the bailiff to take the petit jury to their place of retirement, there to keep them without meat or drink, water excepted."

By rule 3 the bailiff is charged with the duty of keeping "the most profound silence amongst -the bystanders" and "to prevent all persons not- having business from coming within the bar."

Rule y. "The members- of the bar shall be once called aloud by the sheriff at the door of the court house immediately after the opening of the court and before the minutes of the preceding day are read and signed."

Rule 9. "If one attorney shall interrupt another in the examination of a witness by asking a question or in any other manner except by rising in his place and regularly objecting to the court he will be punished."

These remarkable rules further provide that if any attorney wander from the point in argument he will be stopped; that on the calling of the -docket attorneys shall be given precedence according to the dates of their licenses ; that no bill of exceptions containing any part of the evidence in a cause will ever be signed unless the party excepting will reduce the evidence to writing before. the witness retire from the bar or the bill is agreed to by the opposing counsel; that "not more than two counsel will be allowed to argue a cause to the jury on each side, nor in civil cases will common law authori-

Members of the profession. will find a peculiar interest in these rules, and it may be that the administration of justice would be facilitated, and greater respect for our courts imbued in our people, were some of them in force today. Reference to the order books demonstrates that these rules were, at least at times, rigidly enforced.

Indictments for betting, gaming, retailing liquors without license, assault and battery, malicious mischiCT and vending foreign merchandise, bills for divorce and specific performance of law contracts on the chancery side of the court, and actions for debt and on the case on trespass of various kinds, constituted the chief business of the court for many A'ears, and at the September term, 1840, there were no less than forty .criminal cases on the docket. Court business had increased until in 1839 the April term lasted from April 22nd until May 3rd. The murder trial of James Holland occupied the time of the court from May i6th to the 21st in 1838, and the "pleading" of the lawyers, lasting two days, must have given rare entertainment to our citizens. The action of ejectment, or as it was then known, "ejectione firmae," held no small place on our early dockets, quite a different action from the modern action of that name, and is well illustrative of the subtleties and complexities of common law pleading, with which our early lawyers were necessarily familiar. Following is a typical case: John Doe, ex demise John Morrison vs. Richard Roe; September term, 1844. Mr. Doe in his complaint sets out that on August 21st John Morrison leased certain real estate to him for ten years ; that he, Doe, entered upon the real estate and then on the very day the defendant Richard Roe, who happened to be strolling that way, entered also and put off poor Doe, "with force and arms." Attached to this complaint against Roe is a note as follows: "Mr. Joseph Merryfield : I am informed that you are in possession of or claim title to the premises in the foregoing declaration of ejectment, and I being sued in this action as casual ejector only and having no claim whatever to the same, advise you to appear on the ist day of the next term of the Randolph Circuit Court to cause yourself to be made defendant in my stead ; otherwise I shall suffer default and you will be turned out of possession. Your loving cousin, Richard Roe." Mr. Merryfield, being served with this notice by the sheriff, hastens into court and applies to tlie -court for permission to be made defendant in this case, thus proving that, unlike his loving -cousin Roe, he is somewhat interested in the result. The court thereupon allows Mr. Merryfield to enter as a defendant, upon condition that he plead by simply making a denial of the complaint, and that at the trial he shall confess that John Morrison went on the land in question and there executed a lease for ten years to John Doe and that the mischievous Roe thereupon pushed Doe off and took possession himself. Mr. Merryfield will do all these things and get himself substituted for Roe as defendant at the trial and the action will proceed with the question solely one of title between Morrison and Merryfield. It is then apparent that the controversy has been there all the time, that Morrison has claimed title to a farm which Merryfield thinks belongs to him.. Morrison, in order to try. his claim, sues the other in ejectment; but the common law action of ejectment is one for possession of real estate, has had a peculiar history, and must be carefully handled, so these two' men, aided by their diligent attorneys, go through the form of confessing that John Doe has a lease from Morrison and that Roe has dispossessed him. By the process shown above, the battle between the straw men is gradually narrowed down until at the trial poor Doe and Roe are entirely neglected and the two real parties proceed to try their claims to the land.

The action of ejectment was a once common one, and the order books furnish plenty of examples like the above, but the new laws in 1852 abolished all legal fictions and retired Doe and Roe to oblivion.

The following interesting item appears among the minutes of the court made on May 2nd, 1840: "Robert Way is allowed 75 cents for hauling two loads of saw dust to put on the court house floor during the present term of court."

On August 14, 1844, Adam Fey, a German, filed in court a declaration of his intention to become -a citizen of the United States, and on September 5th, following he was placed on trial for the murder of Heltz, his son-inlaw. Martin M. Ray, William Ray, Silas Colgrove and Beattie McClelland were assigned by the court to defend him, and John Davis was prosecutor; the trial lasted six days, Fey was convicted and sentenced to be hanged, and his attorneys were allowed $20.00 each for their six days' work. Fey's sentence was afterward commuted to life imprisonment and he committed suicide in prison.

The new rules of court, -adapted in 1846, provided that each applicant for license to practice law must furnish a certificate of good moral character and that "he has read law diligently under the direction and tuition of some reputable practising attorney at least one year." Unfortunately, our present constitution prevents any such qualification as the latter.

A condition which the modern lawyer may find it difficult to appreciate is illustrated by the following entry, made at the spring term, 1851 : "Or- clfered by the court that the clerk keep the copy of Blackford's Reports furnished by the state for the use of this court, safely in his office during the vacations of this court, to be kept safely locked up."

The first sessions of the probate court presided over by John Wright and William Edwards, associate judges of the circuit court, were held at the houses of Paul Way and Charles Conway, and the first business transacted was the binding of Anthony A\'ay, a minor son of Huldy Way, by his guardian, Jonathan Ozborn, to Thomas Frazier, "to learn the art ofiabor or husbandry,'' until he should aftive at his majority.

The associate judges of the circuit court carried on the probate business oi" the county until 1831, when the legislature gave it a separate probate court. James T. Listen was its first judge, serving from 1831 to 1833, then Zachariah Puckett, i'833-i8.34; Smith Elkins, 1834-1836; Edmund B. Goodrich, 1836-18J2: Beattie McClelland, 1842-1849, and George Debolt from 1849 until the court was abolished by the legislature, in 1852..

John Watts, the first president judge of this circuit, was a Baptist preacher, characterized by O. H. Smith as a man of strong, clear mind, friendly to all, and always courteous to Ihe bar.

Miles C. Eggleston, the next Judge, presided over the third judicial circuit, which extended from the county of Jefferson on the south to the state of Michigan on the north, some 200 miles, and from the Ohio line on the east to White river on the west near where Indianapolis is now located. Judge Eggleston was one of the most prominent and popular of the early Indiana jurists, and many interesting stories of him are told by Mr. Smith. He was an able, fearless and honest judge, especially kind and courteous to young members of the bar, and his figure stands out prominently among the heroes of the "Early Indiana Trials." -

Charles H. Test followed Judge Eggleston on the bench, when he was not yet thirty, years of age. He ranked among the ablest of his profession and practiced law a number of years after his retirement from the bench. Judge Test lived on his farm near Centerville, and was very fond of hunting and fishing and all .outdoor amusements. He became a member of the state legislature, secretary of state, and later, when he removed to Indianapolis, judge of the criminal court of Marion county.

Samuel Bigger, the next circuit judge, came from Rushville. He was a solid, honest, fearless man, and after leaving the bench, served as governor of the state. Judge Bigger is described as a man over six feet high, with a fine face and comrnanding appearance, and an orator in great favor with the people, always closing his speeches with an eulogy of General Harrison.

David Kilgore followed Judge Bigger. Kilgore was popularly known as the "Delaware Chief", was highly successful as a practising lawyer and was a power as a stump speaker. He arfterward served many years in cong'ress. "'

Jeremiah Smith was one of the early settlers' of Randolph county and the proprietor of the town of Union City> He was an energetic and vigoroiis lawyer and a competent judge, and acquired prominence in railroad building and management, becoming 'president of the Cincinnati, Union and Ft. Wayne, and the Evansville, Indianapolis & Cleveland Railroad Companies. Joseph Anthony, of Delaware county, was judge between the 'two terms of Judge Smith. John T. Elliott, of New Castle, followed Judge Smith. He was a sound and able lawyer and afterward became judge of the supreme court. His' opinions rank among the best of the Indiana judges.

Silas Colgrove, a brigadier general of the Civil war, was appointed in 186-!. by Governor Morton to fill out the unexpired term of Judge Elliott, who had been elected to the supreme bench. He was elected judge m the same year and served until 1871, and was again elected in 1873, serving another term of "six years. Judge Colgrove's forte as a lawyer was his knowledge of men and his natural powers to command. He was clearheaded, fair and impartial, and while not profound in "book law," he was a man of excellent judgment, strong common sense and rarely made mistakes. He came to Winchester frOm Steuben county. New York, in 1837 and resided here until shortly before his death, when he returned east.

Jdhn J. Cheney, a former partner of Judge Colgrove, and of Thomas M. Browne, was serving as common pleas judge in 1873 when the legislature abolished that court, and was thereupon appointed judge of the twentyfifth judicial circuit by Governor Hendricks. He served until the, next regular election, when he refused to be a candidate again. Judge Cheney came to Winchester in 1852 from Greene county, Ohio.

He was more than forty years at the bar and was the highest and best '' type of "all-round" lawyer, - clear concise and brief in his pleadings, he had utter contempt for the redundancies and superfluous allegations which characterize the work of so many lawyers; he managed the trial of cases well, and although he was no orator, he was very effective with juries, impressing them invariably with his sincerity and seriousness. He maintained his high reputation on the bench. Judge Cheney was a man of high sense ot honor and strict integrity, fond gi home and family above all else; he had a strong sense of humor, and was loved and honored by all who knew him well. He died at Winchester in 1903.

Jacob M. Haynes, of Portland, served as common pleas judge of Randolph and Jay counties from 1856 to i860, of Jay, Randolph, Blackford and Delaware from i860 to 1870, ajid in the latter year was elected judge of the circuit composed of Jay, Randolph, Blackfprd and Wayne counties. Judge Haynes had a record of twenty-one continuous years' on the bench and was a man of sterling qualities. He was said to be absolutely fair and impartial on the bench. Leander J. Monks occupied the bench of the Randolph Circuit Court continuously from 1878 to 1894. He was elected in 1894 as a supreme judge of the state and served as such until 19 12. He was -among the ablest of Indiana jurists, and his opinions, brief and pointed, are highly regarded. He has helped make much of the legal history of Randolph county and of Indiana. Although still a resident of Winchester, Judge Alonks is now practising law in Indianapolis. A complete sketch of him is given elsewhere.

Garland D. Williamson, now of Ridgeville, served as judge by appointment of Governor }\Iatth(;ws from October to December, 1894. ( Mr. Williams was a nati\'e of Pennsylvania, a soldier of the Civil war, and is now. serving as postmaster at Ridgeville by appointment of President \Vilson. ) Albert O. Marsh, the regularly elected judge, took office at the beginning of 1895. Mr. Marsh had served as a captain in the Civil war with distinction, had been prosecuting ?ttorney and a prominent figure in politics, and proved' to be an able judge. He was a man of strong character and a successful lawyer. He served as judge until 1902, when he was appointed United States pension agent for Indiana. He died at Winchester in 1912. Judge Marsh was vigorous and forceful at the bar and on the bench; of commanding figure and impressive demeanor, and although not always understood, was always sincere and earnest, a conscientious and fearless lawyer and judge. He was an enthusiastic worker in politics, an eloquent speaker, and had an enviable record as a soldier.

In 1902 Governor Durbin appointed John W. Macy, at the time a practising attorney of Winchester, to fill the unexpired term of Judge Marsh who had been appointed pension agent for the state of Indiana, and at the fall election following, Judge Macy was elected without opposition. His term expiring at the end of 1908, he re-entered the law firm ,of Macy, Nichols and Bales, but was soon compelled to retire from the practice by ill health, and died in August, 1912. He was a veteran of the Civil war, an enthusiastic Republican, and a man of indomitable energy with but small ambition for himself. He was a successful lawyer and business man, with an almost. superhuman capacity for hard work, and served the county well as judge.

Judge Macy was succeeded by James S. Engle, another Winchester attorney. Judge Engle had long been in the active practice of law and had met with marked success. His legal ability was of a high order, he was energetic and vigorous in his conduct of cases and was successful before juries, and as a judge he has proven .tireless and efficient, rapidly dispatching the business of the court as it came before, him. His term expires with the present year (1914).

Of the various probate -judges who have been mentioned above. Smith Elkins, Edmund B. Goodrich, Zachariah Puckett, Beattie McClelland and George Debolt were perhaps the most prominent. Elkins was admitted to practise in the Randolph Circuit Court in 1833 and long enjoyed a lucrative . practise at this bar. He served as probate judge from 1834 to 1836.

Edmund B. Goodrich came to Randloph county from Virginia in 183 1, his father having been a judge in that state. He served as probate judge from 1836 to 1842.

Beattie McClelland was born and educated in Ireland and brought with him to the study and practice of law much of his native Irish wit. He was admitted to the bar here in 1839, was probate judge from 1842 to 1849 and practised at this bar until the beginning of the Civil war, when he moved to Columbus, Indiana. He was long in partnership with Moorman Way, was one of the most prominent of Randolph county attorneys, and was afterward elected and served as circuit judge in Bartholomew county.

The common pleas court was of barely twenty years' duration. Its first judge, Nathan B. Hawkins, of Jay county, who had been admitted to practise at this bar in 1841, died in the year of his election, 1853. James

William A. Peelle, the next judge, came to Winchester in 1846 and became^ prosecuting attorney in 1848. He was on the bench from 1854 to i860 and was twice afterward elected, secretary of state. He removed to Centerville, Wayne county, in 1864, and practiced law there until the countyseat was changed to Richmond, after which he lived in that city.. He also served as judge of the criminal court of Wayne county, and was a member of the legislature.

In mentioning the early lawyers who practised at this bar, it should be borne in mind that few of them lived in Randolph county; they came, generally on horseback, with other lawyers, and often riding with the circuit judge, were formally admitted to practise, and when their business was completed rode away to their homes or to other "court towns" in the circuit where they had business.

Alonzo L. Nichols has practiced law with marked success since 1889, .excepting a four years' term as clerk of the Circuit Court, to which office he was elected in 1892. He has been active in church work and in all movements for moral and civic reform.

John W. Newton has won distinction as a trial lawyer, having been connected either on behalf of the prosecution or defense in many of the most important criminal cases tried in this county during the last twentyfive years. '-*

Thomas W. Hutchens was formerly engaged in the teaching profession, but has practiced law in Winchester since 1893. He has served fotir years as deputy prosecuting attorney and has been twice elected mayor of \Vinchest-er.

Silas A. Canada has long been prominent in legal and business circles. He has served as prosecuting attorney and has represented the counts in two terms in the state legislature. He has often been called upon to act as special judge.

The first lawyer admitted was James Rariden, on October 12, 1818, and the following is the record of admissions as shown by the order books:

The above list is necessarily incomplete in places, because of the failure of clerks to index admissions to the bar; where the index does not indicate admissions to the bar as such, the only manner of ascertaining *the members is by going through each order book, page by page - an endless and perhaps profitless task, and a method which of itself makes many omissions possible. The dates of the admission of the following members of the bar have not been acertaihed: W. P. Debolt, Alexander Gullett, Fremont Garrett, F. A. Hay, Ed. M. Ives, Allen Jaqua, F. S. McFarland, C. T. Pickett, E. B. Wood, and J. H. Williamson, and doubtless as many more have been omitted entirely. «

After this, the prosecuting attorneys were elected, and they are as follows : William A. Peelle, Thomas M. Browne, William Garber, James N. Templer, Thomas M. Browne, Daniel M. Bradbury, E. B. Reynolds, Alexander Gullett, Albert O. Marsh, Josiah E. Mellette, Chauncey Medsker, Silas A. Canada, James B. Ross, Benjamin F. Marsh, James B. Ross, Clarkson L. Hutchens, Alonzo L. Bales, Charles L. Watson, Wesley O. Smith, Carl Thompson, Ernst E. Chenoweth, Bert E. Woodbury.

The prosecuting attorneys for the common pleas court were: William Moorman, John J. Cheney, Enos L. Watson, Thomas J. Hosford, Josiah E. Mellette and John J. Hawkins.

Since we have spoken above of the associate judges, who presided with the president judge over the circuit courts in the various counties during the early days, it may be of interest to note who they were. John Wright and William Edwards sat from 1818 to 1823, when John Sample replaced Wright. Wright was, however, soon re-elected, as in 1830 he and Edwards were presiding with Judge Test; in 1833 the associates were John Wright and William Peacock and they served continuously until 1839, when Daniel B. Miller and Littleberry Diggs were elected. In 1846 John Mock replaced Diggs, and in 1847 Daniel B. Miller was replaced by Peter S. Miller. In 1852 the picturesque, but otherwise useless associates were done away with by the new constitution and we hear of them no more. Ebenezer Tucker, in his history of Randolph county, intimates that in addition to the above, Stephen C. Stephens and John T. McKinney were associates; an error, as they were supreme justices of the state.

We have attempted thus far to give a list of attorneys who have practised, and are practising at the bar in Randolph county, and have touched briefly upon the judges of our courts. In now looking at the list of attorneys we shall select a few who have attained more or less prominence, and will ask our readers to bear in mind the fact that we shall not dwell at any length upon those whom we understand will have more complete sketches elsewhere in this work. Their great number makes it impossible, and the fact that many who never intend to practise law, or at least never do practise, take advantage, of our constitutional requirements (or rather lack of requirements) to gain admission to the bar, makes it undesirable, that we should mention each of them.

James Rariden, long one of the most prominent figures at the bar, was one of the strong men of the state in its early history. He came from Centerville and was the leader, of the Wayne bar, was seven years in the state legislature, four years in congress a3|jl a member of the constitutional- convention of 1850. He located in' Wayne county in 1817 and died there in 1856. Rariden was large, physically and intellectually, a strong character in his profession and in public life generally. Prominent in all literature of the early Indiana bar, he appears in Smith's "Early Trials" as an exceedingly interesting figure, for years the circuit companion of the author, who says : "We rode through the wilderness together, ate together, -slept together and were just as near one man as two men could be."

Bethuel F. Morris practiced at his bar in the '20's and '3o"s, was prosecuting attorney in 1821-1822, and afterward served as judge of the Rush Circuit Court. About Cyrus Finch, of Centerville, who was admitted here in 1 82 1, Mr. Smith tells the following story, which serves the double purpose of illustrating the judicial capacity, of the associates and the ready wit of Mr. Finch : "We had a little pass before the associate judges of Wayne county. The case was an assumpsit; I was for the defendant and Mr. Finch for plaintiiT. He proved that my client had promised by parol to pay a , debt another person owed his client. The evidence closed; I thought I had him and took up the statute and read to the associate judges - 'No action shall be brought to charge any person upon any promise'to- answer -for the debt, default or miscarriage of another, unless the promise is in writing, signed by the party to be charged.' This I supposed settled the case, but not so. Mr. Finch - 'Hand me that book, li the court please, that law is void under the constitution of the United States which reads, 'No state shall pass any law impairing the obligation of contracts.' " I saw I was ^one. The Court : 'The constitution of the. United States must prevail ; judgment for the plaintiff.' " It would seem that Finch's good fortune lay in the absence of the president judge.

Charles W. Ewing became one of the ablest and most brilliant lawyers at the Fort Wayne bar and afterward a circuit judge; Lot Bloomfield is mentioned as one of the distinguished lawyers of the state in his day. Martin M. Ray, who was admitted, with Bloomfield, in 1823 and afterward became prosecutor, was evidently a poor writer, a fact of which Mr. Smith did not hesitate to take advantage. The latter tells of an indictment drawn by Ray against one Henson for obstructing a highway with trees and logs, the words being so ill written as to look like "hen's and hogs." Mr. Smith, for Henson, moved to quash the indictment on the ground that there was no statute against hens and hogs running at large, and the judge (associate) declared the words to be "hens and hogs," quashed the indictment and admonished the prosecutor to write a legible hand thereafter, and "cross his t's and dot his i's and not be bothering the court with such questions."

Of Oliver H. Smith we have already written so much that further mention seems superfluous. He was a strong lawyer, and a self-made man who rode away from his home in New Jersey when a boy with no money, ran a coal barge from Pittsburg to Louisville and thence into Indiana in 1817, settling at ConnersVille. He was licensed to practice law in 1820 and made his first appearance at the Randolph county bar in 1825. He was made prosecuting attorney of the third district in 1824, at a time when the southern court was held at Vevay and the northern at Fort Wayne, and rode the circuit with Judge Eggleston for the next two years, attending court in each county twice a year. While he was never a resident of Randolph county, and probably never practised in. our courts to any extent outside of the two years when he was prosecutor, yet his "Early Trials" has given us so much of our legal history that he must take a prominent place in any considera-' tion of the bar of this county. He tells how, in 1825, in company with Judge Eggleston and James Rariden, he rode into Winchester en route to Fort Wayne, and put up at. Paul W. Way's tavern, and how the next night their ponies all ran off and left them as they were encamped on the Wabash. The party trudged through the woods to Townsend's Prairie, procured new ponies there and rode on to Fort Wayne, then a town of two hundred population. Returning after court adjourned they found their captured ponies waiting for them at Winchester and proceeded on to Centerville in time for the opening of court there.

Oliver H. Smith had few equals in the state as a lawyer, and the bar of the state can never repay the debt it owes him for the wealth of legal reminiscence he has left it. He became a congressman and afterward United States senator and spent his later years in the practice of law at Indianapolis, where he was regarded as the head of the state Bar. He was a man great in stature, "full of energy, ready for any contest, strong in argument and laconic in style; an untiring student, grasping the main points of his cases and driving his business through with a powerful hand."

Amos Lane was widely known as a lawyer and politician, became speaker of the state house of representatives and then a congressman; John S. Newman was a fine practical lawyer, clear-headed, of strong, vigorous intellect, and was for thirty years one of the foremost lawyers in the state. He was noted as a skilful pleader, was -an honest and conscientious lawyer, and gave dignity to the profession wherever he practiced. He came into Wayne county in 1807 and lived at Centerville and Richmond until i860 when he ceased the practice of law, removed to Indianapolis and became president of the Merchants 'National Bank. He died in 1882.

Caleb B. Smith who was admitted to this bar in 1829 with Newman, was from Connersville. He studied law under Oliver H. Smith at Connersville and rose to rapid distinction as a lawyer. He was a member of the legislature,, speaker of the house, twice elected to congress, and a member of Lincoln's cabinet. . At his death in 1865 he was the foremost Republican orator in the nation.

James Perry, of Liberty, was a fine lawyer and debator; while not of the sort to impress a jury and secure a verdict in a bad case, he seldom failed to succeed when his cause was just, and ranked high as a commercial and chancery lawyer.

William J. Brown practised at this bar in the '30's afterward becoming a member of congress and assistant postmaster general. He was the father of the late Rear Admiral Brown, of Indianapolis. Henry Cooper, of Fort Wayne, is described as a man possessed of immense legal knowledge which he was unable to apply in his practice. Samuel W. Parker was a graduate of Miami University, licensed at Connersville and first practised in Randolph county in 1832. He stood among the first lawyers of his age in the state and was a great public speaker, serving two terms in congress. David H. Colerick, of Fort Wayne, first came to this county to practise in 1832, and in 1834 Andrew Kennedy, of Delaware county, who learned his law under Samuel W. Parker and rose to considerable prominence and success as a lawyer, was admitted here. James W. Borden became a circuit judge in De Kalb county some years after he practised at this bar.

Up to the year 1839 there were but two resident attorneys of Winchester - Zachariah Puckett and Jeremiah Smith. But in 1839 two Winchester men were admitted whose names have ever since been familiar to residents of this county : Moorman Way and Silas Colgrove. We have already written about the latter. Moorman Way was brought to this county in 1816 and in 1838 he became a student of law under James Perry, of Liberty, qualifying himself so rapidly that he passed his examination and was admitted to the bar the following year. From that time he practised at this bar continuously until the year of his death, 1881. He was a lawyer of the old school, quick and. resourceful and well-grounded in the elementary principles of law. He stood as the head of the Randolph county bar for nearly forty years and participated in nearly every case of importance tried during that time. He contested every point in a case from beginning to end, never admitted anything against his client, rarely overlooked a mistake of his adversary and never gave up until there was no other course open to him. Before a jury he was effective because he understood "men and knew how to apply his logic to their understanding. Remarkable powers 9f sarcasm and invective took the place of oratory and he never failed to make a mean action look meaner to the jury. He will be long remembered for his eccentricity, and he who searches the files of the circuit court will find abundant evidence of the high character and stupendous aniount of his legal labors.

James Hanna, who was admitted to practice here in 1841, was afterward a supreme court judge, while Thomas D. Walpole, who came in the same year, was a distinguished lawyer at Indianapolis; Walter March and J. S. Buckles, of Delaware county, were both admitted here in that year; March was later a member of the commission which revised the statutes in 1852 pursuant to the new constitution. John Davis, later judge at Anderson, and one of the leading lawyers of the state, was admitted here in 1842, and Reuben A. Riley, who was licensed in the same year, was the father of the poet, James Whitcomb Riley.

Nimrod H. Johnson, who practiced here in 1843, was the father of Henry U. Johnson, of Richmond, and Robert Underwood Johnson, edtior of the Century Magazine.

Thomas M. Browne came to Spartanburg from Ohio in 1830, removed to Winchester in 1848 and studiedlaw with William A. Peelle, was admitted to the bar and began practising at once, becoming prosecuting attorney in 1850 and serving four terms. He was in the state senate in 1863, then recruited and became lieutenant colonel of the 7th Indiana' Cavalry, and saw active military service, coming out in 1866 with the rank of brigadier-general by hrevet. He was United States attorney for the district of Indiana from 1869 to 1872, was the Republican candidate for governor in 1872 and was defeated by Thomas A. Hendricks. He practiced law in Indianapolis for a time, then served in congress fourteen years, during^ which time he was a recognized leader of the Republican party. He died at Winchester in 1891. He was a fine lawyer, profound in his knowledge of law, a tireless worker in the preparation and trial of his cases, peerless as an adypeate, and. yet, unlike many oratorical lawyers, a keen student of law. As a jury lawyer, Thomas M. Browne had no superior, at least in Indiana, and that in a day when he encountered such men as Daniel Vorhees. Benjamin Harrison and Thomas A. Hendricks. His mind was luminous, brilliant, his power of speech marvelous, his voice peculiarly penetrating and musical, and his diction beautiful. Some of his addresses to juries have been classed by prominent authorities as among the greatest efforts of the nation's lawyers. Judge Elijah B. Martindale, of New Ca.stle, practised at this bar in 185 1.

Martin B. Miller, of Winchester, was admitted in J 859. Mr. Miller practised for a time with Jeremiah Smith and then entered the army, being mustered^ out in 1865 with the rank of brevet colonel. After the war he was in partnership with L. J. Monks, Alexander Gullet, John Enos Nefif and Emerson McGriff. In his profession he was slow and cautious, but characterized by equanimity of temper and disposition and sound judgments, and was a successful lawyer for inany years. .

Isaac P. Gray, of Union City, practised law from his admission in 1868 until he was elected governor of the state. He was twice lieutenant governor, and was governor from 1885 to 1889, and at the time of his death in 1895 ^Yas United States Minister to Mexico.

John Enos Neff entered the practise of law as a student under Thomas M. Browne in 1868, and in 1874 and 1876 was elected secretary of state. After the expiration of his term of office he returned to Winchester and practised with Martin B. Miller, but died within a short time, while yet a young man, with a bright future before him.

Matthew T. Allen, who also entered the practice here in 1868, afterward removed to California, where he became a judge - of what court the writer is unable to learn. He died recently in Los Angeles.

William A. Thompson began the practise of law in Winchester in 1871 and was in partnership with Albert O. Marsh and wi^h his brother Joseph W. Thompson until 1890, when he removed to Muncie. He is a tireless worker, a keen analyst of legal' propositions, and it is common kjnowledge among the profes'sion that he searches laboriously into every branch of his eases and rarely leaves an authority uncited on any point. He is now engaged in active practise in Muncie as senior member of the firm of Thomp- son and Sprague. Joseph W. Thompson was admitted to the bar at Winchester in. 1 8 76 and was in practice here and at Shelby ville for a number of years thereafter, joining the firm of Thompson, Marsh & Thompson in 1889. He continued in this firm after the removal of his brother and finally after the election of Judge Marsh to the circuit bench. He has devoted a great amount of time and labor to the alphabetical arrangement of cases decided by the higher courts, is the author of "Thompson's Citations," and the numerous supplements thereto and is now engaged in legal work for the government in Washington, D. C.

Levi W, Study entered the profession of law at Winchester in 1872 and was in partnership with James S. Engle from 1874 to 4880. He had a keen, analytical mind, well adapted to the study and practice of law and could have been a highly successful lawyer. He died in 1886.

William Wesley Canada was in the active practice of law in Winchester from 1874 to 1897, when he was appointed by President McKinley as consul at Vera Cruz, Mexico, a position which he still holds and in which he has recently distinguished himself in our troubles with Mexico.

Andrew Stakebake, of Winchester, was a prominent Randolph county attorney for a number of years, being admitted to the bar in 1875. He died in 1897.

In 1876 Samuel R. Bell, of Union City, entered the practice of law, and was in active practice at the time of his death in 1914. Mr. Bell was a good business lawyer and always enjoyed a large practice. He was a man of unimpeachable honor, and while making no pretension to ability as a trial lawyer, yet he attended well to a large amount of legal business and was successful in his practice.

The modern lawyer, as we know him, is so widely separated from the early lawyer, as we have tried here to portray him, that we can scarcely imagine a connecting link between the two ; and indeed there is none outside the records of the court and such history as this. But up to a very few years ago Randolph county had in Enos L. Watson a lawyer who seemed and was the last link in the chain connecting the past with the present; he began the practice here in 1856, in the days of David Kilgore, Jere Smith and Jehu T. Elliott, when the new constitution was still new, and the old lawyers of the bar were perplexed and worried because their old forms of pleading were gone and John Doe and Richard Roe were stricken down by the legislative attack. He practiced with Judge Peelle- until 1861, with Judge Cheney to 1871, with Judge Monks to 1875, with Judge Engle to 1883, and after-

In the memorial, of Mr. Watson which is spread upon the order book$ of the court, the practice of law in Indiana is divided into two epochs: the first, of which we have already written, was characterized by hardy, energetic lawyers, adventurous and generally well educated who came from the east in the infancy of our state, and rode the circuits on horseback, taking such cases as chance assigned them, going into trial pell mell without preparation and depending on ready wit and resource and a knowledge of elementary principles to carry them through; the second was characterized by the advent of young men who were born here or came in their youth with their parents, grew up in log cabins, worked on farms, attended the district schools, read law in the summer and of nights and mornings and taught school in the winter. To the latter class Mr. Watson belonged and yet he knew and practised with many of the representatives of the older school. He is remembered by most of us as an old man, but as an old man full" of memories of his youth. For fifty years his figure, tall, angular and rawboned, was a familiar one in the court room and on the streets of Winchester; in his prime he held first rank at the bar and for the ten years prior to his death he was its Nestor. He had a natural vein of humor which was doubtless developed in his student days under his preceptors, Moorman Way and Beaftie McClelland. He was well grounded in the first principles of law, and had a keen analytical brain, and was a successful jury advocate and trial lawyer. His mind was a veritable store-house of informations and he had a wealth of anecdote always at his command; his sense of humor was so perfect that no matter how far he lost himself in indignation, bitter sar- - casm and invective, he invariably saw something of the ridiculous in the situation and ended with a witticism that put everybody in a good humor again and took the sting from his sarcasm. His figure, his mind, his language, all were quaint and picturesque; simplicity was the key to his character, and Enos L. Watson was one of the most lovable men that ever followed the law. He died at Winchester in 1909.

Emerson McGriff practised at this bar for about ten years subsequent to 1885, and then removed to Portland, where he is now engaged in an active and successful practice; Daniel M. Bradbury and E. B. Reynolds both practiced at this bar and each served as prosecuting attorney for a term. Mr. Bradbury is now a resident of Indianapolis and Mr. Reynolds of Hagerstown.

with his father and Judge Engle in 1885, was admitted to the bar here in the same year, and at once took his place in the front rank of the lawyers of the county. His mind is keen and analytical, well adapted to the law, his memory a storehouse of facts, and his wonderful gift of oratory makes him one of the most successful jury lawyers in the state. He practiced here until 1893 when he moved to Rushville, afterward serving in congress for a number of years. He has long been a national figure in politics and on the lecture platform, and is now engaged in the practice of law at Rushville. His brother, Charles L. Watson, was also a member of the bar of this county, practising with success for a number of years, during two of which he was prosecuting attorney. He is now living in Oklahoma.

Clyde M. Watts and Carl Tisor are other young men who succeeded remarkably in the few years they were members of the local bar. Mr. Watts is now a resident of Cheyenne, Wyoming, and is prosecuting attorney of Laramie county, and Mr. Tisor is also following his profession in the west, as prosecuting attorney of Custer county, Montana. Herbert I. Watts, a brother of Clyde M., is a member of the bar, but has not attempted to practice, having held for many years the responsible position of court reporter.

James P. Goodrich practised at this bar with great success until a few years ago, and is now a member of the firm of Monks, Goodrich and Robbins, in Indianapolis, his partners being Judge L. J. Monks, and John F. Robbins, of Richmond. Mr. Goodrich as a lawyer was noted for his energy and ability to transact a large amount of business in a very short time. He is one of the leading business lawyers of the state and has achieved national prominence in politics, being at this time the Republican national committeeman for Indiana. Union B. Hunt practiced at the Randolph county bar for a number of years, and was a highly successful lawyer. He is now engaged in business in Indianapolis, although, like Mr. Goodrich, he maintains his residence in Winchester.

Frederick S.' Caldwell, who was admitted to practice at this bar in 1890, was for a long time a member of the firm of Engle, Caldwell and Parry, and one of the foremost lawyers of eastern Indiana. He was appointed in 191 3 by Governor Ralston a judge of the appellate court, is now serving in that capacity and is the nominee of the Democratic party for that office for the fall election this year. Mr. Caldwell is a deep and careful student of law, methodical in his analysis of legal propositions, calm and self-possessed in the tria.! of causes, and effective before the jury.

Complete sketches of the resident members of the bar who are now engaged in the practice or on the bench, will appear elsewhere in this work.

SO we need only give them brief mention here. In Winchester there are the following firms and attorneys: Focht and Hutchens, composed of Fermen C. Focht and Thomas W. Hutchens; Benjamin F. Marsh, Edwin S. Jaqua, Walter G. Parry, Thompson and Thompson, composed of Carl and Frank Thompson; Wesley O. Smith, Jesse W. Canaday,' Reverdy Puckett, Canada and Chenoweth, composed of Silas A. Canada and Ernst E. Chenoweth; Macy, Nichols and Bales, composed of John W. Macy, Jr., Alonzo L. Nichols and Alonzo L. Bales; John ^^. Newton, George H. Ward.

In Union City: Shockney Brothers, composed of Theodore and John A. Shockney; Dunn and Woodbury, composed of Ernest Dunn and Bert E. Woodbury; John W. Williams, William Fowler and L. L. Taylor.