HISTORY OF ORANGE COUNTY
CHAPTER 5

EARLY PRACTITIONERS AT THE ORANGE BAR

The earliest attorneys at the Orange Bar were Alexander Dunn, John F. Ross, John H. Thompson, Alexander A. Meek, Henry Stephens, J. R. E. Goodlett, Ebenezer McDonald, Charles Dewey, E. P. Stowes, David Raymond, Henry Hurst, William Hendricks, H. H. Moore, Davis Floyd, William R. Bobbett, Reuben Kidder, and a few others. These men were the flower of the bar of southeastern Indiana in early years. The most of them were men of great professional strength, old practitioners, learned in the law, skillful in practice, with high natural talent and character. Half of them became Judges of their Judicial Districts. There is scarcely a case in the Supreme Court Reports of earlier years from southeastern Indiana that was not argued, pro or con, by one or more of these attorneys. Those who more particularly practiced before the Orange Bar were Stephens, Goodlett, Dewey, Ross, Thompson, Meek, Dunn, Moore, and Hurst. Stephens was a man of unusual talent and culture. His advice was sought in nearly all the cases involving life or large property interests. Goodlett was not a brilliant practitioner. He was phlegmatic and deliberate and a good counselor, but lacked that readiness and rapidity essential to success before a jury. Ross was pre-eminently a jury lawyer. He was bright, apt, adroit, technical, persuasive, plausible, a good story-teller and conversationalist, but was not a profound student of the principles of law. He became Judge of the Second Judicial District then comprising the county of Orange. Many of the cases appealed from his judgment to the Supreme Court were reversed upon well established principles of law or equity. He was a better advocate than a judge. But little can be learned of the professional character of Meek, Dunn, or Hurst. The latter is remembered as a man of great power in the court room. He possessed the highest personal magnetism and natural fitness for his profession, either on the bench or bar, not surpassed in southern Indiana. Meek was a worker. He was slow, but went to the bottom of his cases, but lacked dash. celerity and audacity. Goodlett lived in Paoli for a few years, and was counsel in many of the cases during the decade of the twenties and thirties.

PROFESSIONAL CHARACTER OF MOORE,
THOMPSON AND DEWEY

One of the brightest lawyers of southern Indiana at that period, who lived for a time at Paoli, was Henry H. Moore. He was well educated, and was a prominent member of the Whig party. He became a candidate for Congress and for the Governorship, but was beaten in both races. He was a natural orator, and full of fiery energy. At the bar he excelled as a pleader. He was brilliant rather than profound; was quick at retort, adroit in debate, poetic in fancy, magnetic in manner, and was therefore a jury lawyer of the highest order. His papers, some of which may yet be seen among the county records, show care in preparation. John H. Thompson, who was at first attorney before the Orange bar, but afterward for many years as Judge of the District Circuit Court, was an excellent judge of the application of the principles of law or equity to the case in hand, and was rarely ever reversed in the Supreme Court. It took a skillful lawyer to conceal from him in the depths of conflicting evidence and argument the actual principles involved. He unraveled the web or skein of the most complex or baffling case, and presented the legal and equitable points with a deliberate accuracy surprising to the lawyers. He was well educated, slow, deliberate, auburn-haired, tall, aristocratic, wore a wig, and was rather a poor pleader, as he lacked language, wit and forensic power. Politically, he was a Whig, but took little or no active interest in politics. Charles Dewey was in many respects the ablest lawyer ever a resident of the county or of southern Indiana. He was a hard student, and,to gain his point with the court, would, if necessary, cite scores of cases from all parts of the world, and in all times, involving the principles the application of which he sought. He was, therefore, a profound counselor. If his client's case possessed legal or equitable merits he knew it. His papers were models of strength. skill, pith and perspicuity. His judgment was excellent, his personal and professional character above calumny, his knowledge of the law deep and ready. He was a large man, of fine physique, was solid and deep in debate rather than flashy and oily, but gave sufficient rhetorical color to his arguments to render them interesting to the dullest listener. He never failed to gain the entire attention of court and jury. He was dignified without stiffness, sociable without familiarity, sarcastic without bitterness, and, though an ardent Whig, applied himself solely and assiduously to the practice of the law. He removed to Clarke County about 1836-37.

SUNDRY EARLY COURT ITEMS

In 1818 and 1819 Hugh S. Ross, James R. Higgins, John N. Dunbar, Samuel Liggett, Jeremiah Bowland, Robert Holly, Henry A. Coward and others were admitted to practice at the Orange bar. At the March term, 1820, Wright Sanders was tried for murder. The details of this case cannot be given. The trial ran through several days and terms, and resulted in a verdict of manslaughter, the punishment being a fine of $50, imprisonment in the county jail one hour, and three stripes on the bare back. At this time the docket was quite full with cases of covenant, trover, assault and battery, foreign attachment, appeal, debt, case, trespass on the case, larceny, divorce, ejectment, murder, assumpsit, bastardy. adultery, slander, passing counterfeit money, nuisance, perjury, forgery, etc., etc. Jonathan Doty became President Judge in 1821, and Jacob Call in 1822. R. C. Dewey and Daniel J. Caswell, attorneys, were admitted to practice in 1821. Henry Hurst was Prosecuting Attorney in 1822. John R. Porter became President Judge in 1824; Thomas Vandeveer and John H. Campbell being his Associates. In 1825 John Law was Prosecuting Attorney, and John Miles was admitted to the bar. Many cases during these years were for assault and battery, with intent to commit murder, and owing to the prevailing custom of fighting cannot be wondered at. It was often the case that excellent men were thus indicted. At the February term, 1826, Jacob Cooper and Hiram Cooper were tried on this charge, both being convicted of assault and battery, and the latter of the intent to murder as well. He was fined $25 and costs. John Law prosecuted the pleas of the State; Dewey defended. Isaac Wells was the one killed. He was beaten so with a club that he afterward died from the effect. His own aggressive acts only prevented the jury from fixing a heavier penalty on the Coopers.

THE PORTER-HOGGATT CONTROVERSY

In 1822 John R. Porter, attorney, who had been serving William Hoggatt as Deputy Clerk of the county, appeared in the county in printed band-bills with affidavits from several persons to the effect that Hoggatt was guilty of malfeasance in office. Specific charges were made that he had misappropriated court funds to his own use. He answered in an open printed letter to the public, with affidavits of persons whom the complaint had charged were injured, showing that the charges were unjust, false, etc., but the matter remained in doubt and no lawsuits resulted. Under the authority of the Circuit Court an investigation was held, but with no damaging result to Hoggatt. Soon afterward Judge Call examined the Clerk's office, and made the following report:

STATE OF INDIANA, ORANGE COUNTY.

}SS.

October Term, 1822, Third Day of Term.

Having this day concluded the examination of the Clerk's office of said county, I report that I found all things in good order.

J. CALL, President Judge First Judical Circuit.

NEXT