Part 24
When practicing law, Judge Tilden was distinguished for his abilities as an advocate, and his qualifications for the judicial office he fills is attested by his repeated re-elections to it. His officiai conduct has been marked by uniform kindness, attention to the duties of his office, and the interests of those having business with it, and a constant endeavor to do right by all, whether rich or poor, learned or ignorant. If he has committed any errors--and no Judge, from the Supreme Court down, but must plead guilty to some--they have been errors of judgment only, and not of interest. No one can deny to Judge Tilden unimpeached honesty of purpose, warmth of heart, and an earnest endeavor to deal justly with all men.
[Illustration: Yours Truly, C. M. Palmer]
Charles W. Palmer.
Prominent among the young men of the profession who promise to take and worthily fill the places of the old leaders of the Cleveland Bar now partly superannuated and soon to retire from active life, is Charles W. Palmer.
Mr. Palmer was born in Norwich, New London county, Connecticut, September 8, 1826. Nine years after, his father, Joseph B. Palmer removed to Cleveland with his family, and was for a time engaged in the storage business on the river. He is now in the employ of the Cleveland & Pittsburgh Railroad Company. Charles had only the advantages of the common schools until he was sixteen, but before he reached that age he had manifested an industry at his books which promised well for his future. He taught school on "the ridge" West of Cleveland, walking out to the school house and back before and after school hours, and at the same time prosecuting his own studies. He prepared for College under Rev. S. B. Canfield and W. D. Beattie, of Cleveland, and when nearly eighteen was admitted to Western Reserve College at Hudson. He graduated in 1848, with the highest honors of his class. For two years after graduation he was principal of the High School in Akron, and the next year a tutor in Western Reserve College. Coming to Cleveland again after this, he studied law in the office of Judge Foote, and was admitted to the Bar in the Fall of 1853. In the Spring of the following year he made his first success in political life, being elected to the City Council. In the Spring of 1859, he was elected city attorney. The duties of this office he discharged satisfactorily to all, and found the practice it brought a material help in his profession. In the Fall of 1863, Mr. Palmer was elected prosecuting attorney for the county. Here he was brought very prominently into notice by the successful prosecution of several important cases.
In his profession, Mr. Palmer has been a constantly rising man, until now he is on one or the other side of most of the important cases in our courts. His reputation as a criminal lawyer is especially high. In 1865, he prosecuted the celebrated Hughes murder case successfully. Two years afterwards he defended McConnell, the murderer, and in 1868, defended Mrs. Victor, in one of the most remarkable poisoning cases ever brought into court. His argument in the latter case was a masterpiece of legal acumen, forcible exposition, and polished speech. Mr. Palmer began the practice of law in Cleveland in the firm of Palmer & Austin. Afterwards he was associated with R. B. Dennis, Esq., and at present he is senior in the firm of Palmer & De Wolf.
In July, 1819, Mr. Palmer married Miss Sabrina Parks, of Hudson, Ohio. This estimable lady died in little more than a year after the marriage, leaving a son but a few weeks old. The son still survives. In 1855, Mr. Palmer married Miss Minerva Stone, a sister of Mr. S. S. Stone, of Cleveland. This second wife died in childbed eleven months after marriage, and in 1858, Mr. Palmer married his present wife. She was Miss Lucy Hubbell, a daughter of Calvin Hubbell, Esq., of New York. By this marriage there is a son now about ten years old.
In politics, Mr. Palmer has been a member of the Republican party since its organization. He gave the war for the Union an earnest, active and powerful support. No man appreciated more thoroughly the principles involved in that contest, and few indeed have the power to present those principles so well as he. His party services have been numerous and efficient. A man of fine personal appearance, with a fair, open face, which carries with it the conviction of sincerity in all he says, possessed of a grace of manner which makes it a pleasure to hear him on any subject, and having such a command of language as to enable him to put his thoughts in the fittest words, he is of course a favorite speaker always. He has a conscientiousness in all he does, which never allows him to treat carelessly any matter, even in an unexpected public speech. There are few men in Cleveland who carry so much weight in speaking, whether it be before a court and jury, or to a general assembly of people. Taking an intelligent interest in all public affairs, he yet devotes himself studiously to his profession, in which he has as bright prospects as any man at his age need wish for.
William Collins.
William Collins was born at Lowville, New York, the county seat of Lewis county, February 22, 1818. He was a son of Ela Collins, who was a son of General Oliver Collins, of Oneida county, New York, and Maria Clinton, daughter of Rev. Isaac Clinton, of Lowville.
Mr. Collins read law with his father, and was admitted to practice in the courts of New York, at Rochester, in September, 1813. In October, 1843, he formed a copartnership with his father, under the firm name of E. & W. Collins. They continued in active and successful practice until the death of his father, in 1849. Immediately after Mr. Collins' admission to the Bar, he was elected, as the successor of his father, public prosecutor. This office he held until 1846, when he resigned, having been elected, by the Democratic party, in November, 1846, at the age of twenty-seven, a member of the House of Representatives, in the Thirtieth Congress. The district represented by him was composed of Lewis and St. Lawrence counties. He was in Congress in the years 1847-8-9, during the first agitation of the question of extending slavery to the free territories. Mr. Collins opposed the proposed extension with much zeal and ability. Among his speeches will be found one delivered July 28, 1848, on the "Bill to establish the territorial government of Oregon," advocating the Wilmot Proviso. Apart from its merit as a brilliant literary production, it contains many passages that will be read with much interest by the general reader, as showing the beginning of the end at which we have arrived. Slavery itself having now become a matter of history, we think it will be of interest to introduce the following extracts from the Congressional Globe of July, 1848:
I shall assume, then, sir, that the institution does not exist in our late Mexican acquisitions, but that it has been effectually prohibited. The real question, then, is shall the laws securing _freedom_ in these Territories be abolished, and _slavery_ established? This is indeed, sir, a question of the gravest magnitude. To millions of the oppressed and degraded children of Africa, it is an issue upon which depends all that is dear to them in life--all that is bitter in the hour of death. It seems to me, sir, that they are even now stretching forth their dark hands, and beseeching us, in the name of the God of liberty whom our fathers worshipped, to remove from them the poisoned cup of bondage--to forge for them no more chains. The termination of this question also involves the dearest interests of every person in this country who desires to sustain himself by honorable labor. It intimately concerns our national honor, reputation, and progress in the great family of nations. The two hundred and fifty thousand immigrants who annually land upon our shores are in pursuit of 'free soil and free labor.' Can we pronounce in favor of slavery, without danger to our experiment at self-government? If we thus decide, what will become of the cherished hopes of the friends of civilization, Christianity, and human progress?
Those who insist upon preserving freedom in the Territories, have no desire to disturb the institution of slavery in the States. The Constitution confers upon them no such authority. They could not interfere with it if they would, and they would not if they could. They have ever heretofore been, and still are, ready strictly to fulfil the constitutional provisions upon this subject.
I shall aim to discuss this question with a proper regard for the most sensitive feelings of our brethren of the slave States, but also, sir, with a plainness commensurate with its profound importance. The legislatures of thirteen of the States of the Union, including Delaware, which still has two thousand slaves, have passed resolutions instructing their Senators and requesting their Representatives in Congress to oppose any further extension of slavery. There is but one sentiment upon this subject throughout the free States--it is that of eternal and _uncompromising_ hostility to the project. They will never consent that the free and virgin soil of the Territories shall be blighted and cursed by the tears of the slave, while they have a will to determine, or a muscle to resist.
The proposition to make this Government the instrument for planting slavery upon soil now free, is regarded by a few at the North as so improbable and monstrous, that they have refused to believe that it is seriously entertained. Startling as the proposal is, it is nevertheless true.
* * * * *
Another argument employed by these apologists is, that the 'Proviso,' or a law prohibiting slavery in these Territories, is unnecessary; that it is an abstraction--a 'firebrand' employed by demagogues and factionists to kindle strife in the Democratic party; that the Territories are now free, and that they will so continue, unless an act of Congress is passed establishing slavery. It is impossible to avoid asking ourselves why, if these gentlemen are sincere--if they truly believe that slavery can not and will not go there, and they do not desire that it should--why they so strenuously oppose the passage of such a prohibition? If their views are correct, then such a law would be a mere harmless superfluity. But, sir, this '_firebrand of freedom_' is a thing more exalted and noble than a mere abstraction. It is wielded by men of strong arms, adamantine will, and hearts animated by the divine impulses of patriotism and liberty. They have registered a vow in Heaven to employ every lawful and constitutional means to roll back the dark tide of slavery from the temple of Freedom, and vindicate the character of the Republic from the disgrace and reproach of establishing slavery in a free territory. We are no abstractionists. The Representatives in this Congress from the fifteen slaveholding States of the Union, without an exception, and without distinction of party, avow an intention to carry their slaves into these Territories, and there hold them in bondage. They assert, with passionate vehemence, that they have such a constitutional right. They have even told us, sir, that, regardless of the remonstrances of the people of the North--heedless of any prohibitory law of Congress upon the subject, they would invade the free soil of the Pacific, and take with them their slaves, and weapons of defence! Are these declarations abstractions? Do they make no appeal for immediate, energetic and prohibitory legislation?
[Illustration: W. Collins]
When driven from every other argument, gentlemen of the South threaten, that if the 'Proviso' or a law prohibiting slavery in free territory, is passed, they will dissolve the Union. At the North, the dissolution of the Union is not regarded as among possible events. Its value is never calculated. It has been cemented by too many common and glorious sacrifices and struggles; it is protected by too many pious invocations of its magnanimous founders, to be easily severed. The cause by which these fraternal bonds are sundered must be other than a refusal on the part of the free States to allow the Government to establish slavery in free territory. A submission to the will of the majority is a fundamental principle of our institutions. If the North are overborne in this contest, they must and will submit. If the demands of the South are denied by the decision of the majority, a like cheerful and ready acquiesence is expected. Until, however, the majority have decided, no legal and constitutional efforts to exclude slavery from these Territories will be abated by passionate threats against the peace and perpetuity of the Union. The Union would never have been formed had the present demand of the slave States been made and insisted upon. A proposition in the Constitutional Convention to make the Government a propagandist of slavery in free territory, would have been indignantly rejected.
Whilst we stand here, upon the floor of the American Congress, at the noon of the nineteenth century, gravely discussing whether or not we will extend and perpetuate slavery, the monarchical governments of Europe are striking off shackles and 'letting the oppressed go free.' Slavery has been abolished by the French colonies. Portugal, Spain, and Russia, are moving in the work of emancipation. Within a few years England has given liberty to eight hundred thousand slaves. She has expended, within the last forty years, one hundred millions of dollars in suppressing the slave trade. Is it reserved for the Government of 'free, happy America,' in the midst of examples like these, to be fastening corroding chains upon human beings? Sooner than be involved in such stupendous guilt, let our name and existence perish among the nations.
On the part of the North no 'compromises' can be made. But one answer--a stern, unyielding NO--will be given to all such proposals. We have made all the concessions that we can make, or ought to make. If a law under the name of a 'compromise' is passed, planting slavery upon a single square mile of free territory, it will have no rest. REPEAL! will be shouted from the mountain tops of the North, and reverberated in thunder tones through the valleys. The preservation of 'free soil for free men,' will alone be satisfactory. For this purpose, the passage of an act of Congress prohibiting slavery in free territory, will be unceasingly urged, until the great measure is consummated.
During this Congress, although the anti-slavery-extension men were in a minority in both branches, all compromise bills were defeated, and their defeat was due in a good degree to the industrious and vigilant efforts of Mr. Collins, and a few associates in the House.
Mr. Collins was tendered a renomination to the thirty-first Congress, but having determined to remove to the West, he declined, and Preston King was elected in his stead. He continued, with much success, the business of the late firm of E. & W. Collins, until December, 1853, when he removed to Cleveland and opened a law office. He was soon elected a director of the Merchants Bank of Cleveland, and of the Lake Shore Railway Company. Subsequently he became a director in the Bellefontaine Railway Company; the Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati and Indianapolis Railway Company; the Jamestown and Franklin Railway Company, of Pennsylvania; the East Cleveland Street Railroad Company; the Mercer Iron and Coal Company, of Pennsylvania, and the Merchants National Bank, of Cleveland, the active duties of which positions have absorbed very much of his attention and time. He has occasionally appeared in the courts here in litigated cases, but has mainly confined his professional work to his office. Mr. Collins had a high standing as a lawyer in New York, and has fully sustained his early reputation here. He is most remarkable for an admirably fair and clear way of stating and arguing to the court and jury, the questions both of law and fact. This contributed greatly to his success, not only as a forensic advocate, but as a political orator, and legislative debater.
The sympathies of Mr. Collins having always been on the side of freedom, he joined the Republican party on its organization, and has remained faithful to its principles. When the Rebellion broke out he threw himself heartily into the cause of the Union, and contributed freely with money and labor in every available way for the furtherance of the Union cause. He served on the local military and other committees, working faithfully and energetically, and contributing largely to the excellent record Cleveland and the county made during the war, by repeatedly and promptly filling the quota of troops required, and by liberal contributions in aid of the sick and wounded soldiers. Whenever an effort was needed, the voice of Mr. Collins was heard exhorting the people earnestly to energetic
## action and liberal contributions, and his exhortations were promptly and
efficiently seconded by his own example. With him precept and practice went together.
Such men as Mr. Collins would do the people valuable service were they chosen to fill responsible places in the legislative councils and executive departments of the State and Nation. But in these days something more than--or it may too often be said--something different from abilities of the description possessed by Mr. Collins, seems to be required to secure the favor of the people, or rather of the political managers. He is of too ingenuous a nature to yield to the intrigues and servility, too often, now-a-days, demanded of political candidates by the managers.
On November 20th, 1816, Mr. Collins was married at Columbus, to Jane, second daughter of the late Alfred Kelly--the two families having been early neighbors and friends in New York. Two children of this marriage survive, Frederick and Walter, the former seventeen years of age at the present time, and the latter fourteen.
Rufus Percival Ranney.
Rufus P. Ranney, one of the most profound jurists this country has produced, was born at Blandford, Massachusetts, October 30, 1813. His father, Rufus Ranney, was an honest, industrious farmer, of Scotch descent. His mother, whose maiden name was Dottie D. Blair, came from revolutionary stock.
About the year 1822, Rufus Ranney removed with his family to Ohio. After a short stay at Fairport, Lake county, they finally located at Freedom, Portage county, where they made a permanent settlement upon a farm. It was there that Rufus P. Ranney spent the years of his early manhood, and there his parents lived until their decease. Judge Ranney's father was highly respected in the neighborhood where he lived, and, though in humble circumstances, did all within his power for the education of his children, training them in the pathway of honesty and integrity--traits of character which have marked the public and private career of his distinguished son. His mother, an amiable woman who had received a good education, was very attentive to her children, and her son, Rufus P. doubtless owes much of whatever he has been in life to her early teachings.
Until he became of age, Rufus P. Ranney was engaged upon his father's farm, obtaining, during the winter season, a few weeks education at such schools as a country village then afforded. He attended the college at Hudson for a season, but circumstances prevented his remaining long enough to graduate with his class.
In the year 1835, having determined to make a start in life for himself, he left his home and traveled on foot to Jefferson, Ashtabula county. In a speech made by him at Ashtabula in September, 1868, he referred to the time of his arrival at Jefferson, his worldly goods consisting of the clothing upon his person, and _one_ extra shirt, which he carried in the top of his hat.
Entering the office of Benjamin F. Wade, he applied himself with diligence to the study of the law, and after a clerkship of one year was admitted to the Bar. Soon afterward he entered into partnership with his preceptor. The firm of Wade & Ranney was a powerful one, and "ruled the circuit" of North Eastern Ohio. For several years it enjoyed an extensive practice. The firm was dissolved upon the removal of Judge Ranney to Warren, (1844,) and Mr. Wade was soon afterward chosen President Judge of the Third Judicial District, from which position he was transferred to the Senate of the United States.
In 1846, and again in 1848, Judge Ranney was an unsuccessful candidate for Congress. In the Trumbull district the Whig party was largely in the majority, and though Judge Ranney was defeated, he ran considerably ahead of the general ticket, reducing the Whig majority to hundreds, when before, that party had triumphed by thousands.
The people having determined that a convention be held to form a new constitution, Judge Ranney was chosen to represent the counties of Trumbull and Geauga. The convention was held in 1850. It was composed of the first men of the State; both parties seem to have vied with each other in sending their ablest representatives. There were William Medill, its President, who afterwards became Governor of the State; the venerable Ex-Governor Vance; Henry Stanbery, late Attorney General of the United States; Peter Hitchcock, for thirty years a judge of the Supreme Court; Benjamin Stanton, long a member of Congress; Judges Joseph E. Swan, Sherlock J. Andrews, Simeon Nash and William Kennon; Charles Reemelin, D. P. Leadbetter, William Sawyer, and others not less prominent in the Judicial and political annals of Ohio.
In that convention, Rufus P. Ranney greatly distinguished himself. Although but thirty-six years of age he commanded the respect and admiration of all its members, and won for himself a high reputation as a sound lawyer and ready debater. No one was more looked to for advice, and none more generally correct in giving it. He was, in fact, a leader, whose council, in almost every instance, was acceded to by the convention. All the propositions which he introduced were for the welfare and benefit of the people. In the official report of the debates will be found his views upon nearly or quite all of the questions which agitated the convention. He was the champion of the people against monopolies, and many of the most important provisions in the constitution are the work of his hand.
The course which he pursued met the hearty approval of the people and made his name prominent throughout the State. In response to the wishes of the members of the legal profession, and the general desire of the public, he was, by the legislature of 1851, chosen one of the judges of the Supreme Court. When the new constitution went into effect, he was elected to the same position by a large majority.
Judge Ranney occupied a place upon the Supreme Bench until 1856, when he resigned on account of ill health. That year he was a member of the Cincinnati National Convention, which nominated James Buchanan for President.
In March, 1857, Judge Ranney, unsolicited on his part, received from President Buchanan the appointment of United States Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio. This position he held until July, when he resigned. He then removed to Cleveland, where he resumed the practice of his profession, as a member of the firm of Ranney, Backus & Noble.