DOCSLIB.ORG

The Elite Federal Bar in Baltimore, 1818–1834

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Elite Federal Bar in Baltimore, 1818–1834 The Elite Federal Bar in Baltimore, 1818–1834 by Steven M. Klepper s the federal bar was taking shape in the early the close of the session, the justices and the Supreme Court decades of the 19th century, Baltimore, Md., was bar would scatter across the country to ride the circuit. Ahome to a disproportionate share of that bar’s elite Baltimore was the site of two federal trial courts. One members. G. Edward White, in his volume of The Oliver was the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, Wendell Holmes Devise History of the Supreme Court, which had jurisdiction over admiralty and maritime cases, observed that the “period from 1815 to 1835 was one of certain cases involving aliens, and federal misdemeanors. the highwater marks in the history of the Supreme Court The district court held four sessions in Baltimore each bar.1 Of the six pre-eminent attorneys whom Professor year, commencing on the first Tuesday of March, June, White profiled in the book, the law practices of three September, and December.3 A succession of three district of them—Luther Martin, William Pinkney, and William judges occupied one seat on the district court during this Wirt—were centered in Baltimore. After the deaths of time period: James Houston, who served from 1806 to Martin and Pinkney in the early 1820s, future Chief Justice 1819; Theodorick Bland, who served from 1819 to 1824; Roger Taney, himself an accomplished advocate before and Elias Glenn, who served from 1824 to 1836. the Marshall Court, moved his practice to Baltimore. At a The second federal court in Baltimore was the U.S. time when the U.S. attorney general was a part-time posi- Circuit Court for the District of Maryland, which had tion, Pinkney, Wirt, and Taney all served in that role while original jurisdiction over diversity cases and federal ques- maintaining private practices in Baltimore. tion cases as well as appellate jurisdiction over the rul- William Wirt was a prolific letter writer. His personal ings handed down by the district court. The circuit court, papers provide a detailed record of the Baltimore trial made up of the district judge and the Supreme Court practices of these leading Supreme Court advocates start- justice assigned to the Fourth Circuit, sat in Baltimore ing in 1818. Wirt’s writings portray courtrooms packed with twice each year, with sessions commencing on May 1 spectators who were there to witness the attorneys’ rival- and November 7.4 ries and oratory. The attorneys worked hard, at great cost From 1811 to 1835, Gabriel Duvall was the Supreme to their health and personal lives. In return, they earned Court justice assigned to Maryland. In contrast with the fame in their time, but not necessarily great fortune. pre-eminent lawyers practicing before him, Justice Duvall was one of the Supreme Court’s all-time least distinguished The Baltimore Federal Courts members. He authored a total of 15 opinions during his 23 In the early 19th century, the annual session of the years of service.5 In addition, it appears that Justice Duvall Supreme Court began on the first Monday of February.2 At did not publish any opinions handed down by the circuit July 2011 | The Federal Lawyer | 31 court. His judicial silence is particularly notable because the that practiced before the Marshall Court in its early years Fourth Circuit, which then consisted of only Maryland and came from those two cities.”14 In January 1818, Wirt listed five Delaware, was by far the easiest assignment in the era of reasons why a young protégé, Francis Walker Gilmer, should circuit riding. Roger Taney, Duvall’s successor on the Fourth set up a practice in Baltimore, rather than in Richmond: Circuit, would later estimate his own annual circuit riding consisted of only 438 miles.6 1. It is a larger theatre and the business, I understand, much Justice Duvall’s passivity was probably not too noticeable greater. during the trials over which he presided. After all, early 19th- 2. The bar is not so strong, nor so firmly fixed in the saddle century attorneys were, above all else, orators. Even before the as in Richmond. This is an important consideration while Supreme Court, according to White, “there were no time limits you are yet in your apprenticeship. on arguments,” and “Justices put relatively few questions to 3. The profitable business in Baltimore depends on the mari- counsel. ... Written briefs were rare and ... not required.”7 time law, which is of such easy acquisition that you may commence practice with it, at once, and master it wholly Attorneys General in Private Practice in six months. Before the establishment of the Department of Justice in 4. You are entirely new at Baltimore and may take any 1870, the U.S. attorney general was a cabinet officer without ground of elevation you choose to start from. a department. The attorney general’s statutory duties con- 5. There are frequent appeals from Baltimore to the Supreme sisted only of arguing cases for the United States before the Court here, which will soon give you an opportunity of Supreme Court and of rendering legal advice to the execu- presenting yourself in the great focus of national observa- tive branch.8 Because the duties of the office were much tion.15 narrower than those of other cabinet officials, the attorney general received lower pay. Congress expected attorneys Shortly after dispensing the foregoing advice, Wirt prose- general to supplement their incomes by maintaining private cuted his first case in Baltimore in May 1818. President James law practices.9 Monroe requested that Wirt aid in a high-profile prosecution William Pinkney, who served as James Madison’s attorney for mail robbery.16 When Wirt observed that such an assign- general from December 1811 to February 1814, “resided ment was outside the scope of his statutory duties, the U.S. altogether in Baltimore during the short period of his incum- government separately retained Wirt at a cost of $1,500.17 bency, and maintained his post almost without interruption The stagecoaches to Baltimore were “badly managed,” but, to his private engagements at the bar.”10 Congress responded to the relief of Wirt’s fellow travelers, his stagecoach made it by passing an act requiring the attorney general to reside in to Baltimore in record time because the attorney general was Washington, D.C., and Pinkney resigned shortly thereafter.11 aboard.18 Wirt’s “first question upon leaving the stage was This residency requirement presented a problem for whether the mail robbers were under trial—the answer was Pinkney’s successors. The young city of Washington had that the court had risen for the day[,] Judge Duvall being in yet to develop into a center of litigation. Thus, unless the his room above stairs.”19 After Wirt went to his room at the attorney general was independently wealthy, the low govern- inn where the case was being heard, Justice Duvall “came ment pay required the individual to leave the city in order to into my room … while I was shaving a few minutes after- maintain a private legal practice. wards and informed me that the trial would not take place William Wirt, who was appointed to the post of attorney ‘till Saturday.’”20 After one week of trial, the jury delivered a general on Nov. 13, 1817, held the position for more than 11 guilty verdict and a sentence of death.21 years. The residency requirement led to an unhappy physical Thus, Wirt quickly saw the city as a potential focus for separation between Wirt and his family. Elizabeth Wirt main- his own legal practice: “I have it in contemplation to try the tained the family home in Washington with their 10 children effect of an admission to the State bar of Baltimore before I and integrated herself into Washington society, while her leave this place—my friends here think it will be worth 4 or husband traveled much of the year.12 5000 $ a year to me—which will be a decent addition to my The Wirts’ personal loss was history’s gain, however. practice in Washington.”22 The Baltimore bar granted Wirt, During the 1810s and 1820s, the mail operated seven days as the U.S. attorney general, immediate admission. However, per week, with mail stages running between Baltimore and Wirt’s protégé, Gilmer, chose Richmond for his law practice Washington several times each day. The Wirts’ constant cor- after he learned about the Baltimore bar’s rule requiring three respondence offers a detailed view of the trial practices of years’ residence in Maryland before admission.23 Wirt urged the Supreme Court bar. Gilmer to seek an exception to the rule, so that they could start a practice together, but Gilmer declined.24 Justice Wirt’s Arrival in Baltimore During his tenure as attorney general, Wirt spent approxi- Wirt admitted that his “single motive for accepting the mately six months each year in Baltimore. He also built office was the calculation of being able to pursue my pro- a state appellate practice before the Court of Appeals of fession on a more advantageous ground—i.e. more money Maryland. Wirt spent only about three months of the year— for less work.”13 Baltimore presented a natural choice for a from January to March—at his Washington home. Those location in which Wirt would build a lucrative trial practice. three months were Wirt’s most grueling stretch of the year, “Because Washington was relatively inaccessible to any major as he wrote attorney general opinions and prepared for and city save Philadelphia and Baltimore, the majority of lawyers argued cases before the Supreme Court.25 32 | The Federal Lawyer | July 2011 Wirt versus Martin and Pinkney his vast powers in their fullest effect,” leading Justice When Wirt established his private practice in Baltimore Duvall and District Judge Houston to determine that “the in 1818, he was familiar with his two chief rivals, Luther crimes charged in the indictment were the only ones to be Martin and William Pinkney.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • United States V. Hodges: Treason, Jury Trials, and the War of 1812
    FOREWORD: Title United States v. Hodges: Treason, Jury Trials, and the War of 1812 Author Jennifer Elisa Smith Document Type Article Publication Date 2016 Keywords Legal history, treason, jury, Justice Gabriel Duvall, War of 1812 Abstract In August 1814 a number of British soldiers were arrested as stragglers or deserters in the town of Upper Marlboro, Maryland. Upon learning of the soldiers’ absences the British military took local physician, Dr. William Beanes, and two other residents into custody and threatened to burn Upper Marlboro if the British soldiers were not returned. John Hodges, a local attorney, arranged the soldiers’ return to the British military. For this, Hodges was charged with high treason for “adhering to [the] enemies, giving them aid and comfort.” The resulting jury trial was presided over by Justice Gabriel Duvall, a Supreme Court Justice and Prince Georges County native, and highlights how the crime of treason was viewed in early American culture and the role of the jury as deciders of the facts and the law in early American jurisprudence. Contextually, Hodges’ trial took place against the backdrop of the War of 1812 and was informed by the 1807 treason trial of Aaron Burr. Disciplines Law, constitutional history, legal history 1 UNITED STATES V. HODGES:1 TREASON, JURY TRIALS, AND THE WAR OF 1812 Jennifer Elisa Smith INTRODUCTION In August 1814 as British forces left a burned and ravaged Washington, D.C. a number of British soldiers were arrested as stragglers or deserters in the town of Upper Marlboro in Prince Georges County Maryland.2 Upon learning of the soldiers’ absences the British military took local physician, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • The Full Story of United States V. Smith, Americaâ•Žs Most Important
    Penn State Journal of Law & International Affairs Volume 1 Issue 2 November 2012 The Full Story of United States v. Smith, America’s Most Important Piracy Case Joel H. Samuels Follow this and additional works at: https://elibrary.law.psu.edu/jlia Part of the Diplomatic History Commons, History of Science, Technology, and Medicine Commons, International and Area Studies Commons, International Law Commons, International Trade Law Commons, Law and Politics Commons, Political Science Commons, Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration Commons, Rule of Law Commons, Social History Commons, and the Transnational Law Commons ISSN: 2168-7951 Recommended Citation Joel H. Samuels, The Full Story of United States v. Smith, America’s Most Important Piracy Case, 1 PENN. ST. J.L. & INT'L AFF. 320 (2012). Available at: https://elibrary.law.psu.edu/jlia/vol1/iss2/7 The Penn State Journal of Law & International Affairs is a joint publication of Penn State’s School of Law and School of International Affairs. Penn State Journal of Law & International Affairs 2012 VOLUME 1 NO. 2 THE FULL STORY OF UNITED STATES V. SMITH, AMERICA’S MOST IMPORTANT PIRACY CASE Joel H. Samuels* INTRODUCTION Many readers would be surprised to learn that a little- explored nineteenth-century piracy case continues to spawn core arguments in modern-day civil cases for damages ranging from environmental degradation in Latin America to apartheid-era investment in South Africa, as well as criminal trials of foreign terrorists.1 That case, United States v. Smith,2 decided by the United * Associate Professor, Deputy Director, Rule of Law Collaborative, University of South Carolina School of Law.
    [Show full text]
  • Breaking Barriers in History
    Breaking Barriers in History Take inspiration for your 2020 History Day project from the Chesapeake Bay! Many of these topics can be researched at the Chesapeake Bay Maritime Museum. Colonial and Revolutionary Era Gilded Age to World War II • William Claiborne, the Calverts, and the • The Maryland Workmen’s Compensation Act dispute over Kent Island (1902), Franklin v. The United Railways and • Maryland Toleration Act (1649) Electric Company of Baltimore (1904), and the evolution of workers’ compensation laws • Peggy Stewart and the Annapolis Tea Party • Gustav Brunn and the history of Old Bay • The tobacco industry in the Chesapeake • Myers v. Anderson (1915) • Battle of the Severn • William Preston Lane, Jr. and the Chesapeake Early National and Antebellum Era Bay Bridge • Compromise of 1790 • Rachel Carson and the environmental • Chesapeake-Leopard affair and the Embargo movement of 1807 • Crab pickers, packinghouse workers and the • Emancipation of Maryland and Virginia strikes of the 1930s slaves by the British during the War of 1812 • Ruth Starr Rose, advocating for racial respect • William Pinkney (politician, lawyer and through art diplomat) Civil Rights Movement/ • Richard Allen, Absalom Jones, Daniel Coker, Vietnam War to the Present and the formation of the African Methodist • Gloria Richardson, the Cambridge Movement, Episcopal (AME) Church (1816) and riots of 1963 and 1967 • Mason-Dixon Line • Morgan v. Virginia (1946) • Charles Ball and Fifty Years in Chains; or, • The Clean Water Act (1972) The Life of an American Slave
    [Show full text]
  • JOSEPH ALMEIDA PORTRAIT of a PRIVATEER, PIRATE & PLAINTIFF, PART I Jeffrey Orenstein
    JOSEPH ALMEIDA PORTRAIT OF A PRIVATEER, PIRATE & PLAINTIFF, PART I Jeffrey Orenstein Copyright © 2007 Jeffrey Orenstein Second Series • Spring 2007 Volume 10 • Number 3 Published by The Green Bag, Inc., in cooperation with the George Mason University School of Law. Jose Almeida versus the Spanish Empire Don Jose Almeida was, notwithstanding his protests, a pirate. For more than a dozen years, he raided the Spanish merchant fleet and – as the letter above suggests (see the back cover if your Spanish is rusty) – he cruised against Spain with the brass and fervor of a man driven by both vengeance and the cause of liberty. His piracies stirred international controversies and spawned a bevy of lawsuits, three of which reached John Marshall’s Supreme Court. An abbreviated account of his remarkable story begins on page 307 with Jeffrey Orenstein’s article, Joseph Almeida: Portrait of a Privateer, Pirate & Plaintiff, Part I. JOSEPH ALMEIDA PORTRAIT OF A PRIVATEER, PIRATE & PLAINTIFF, PART I Jeffrey Orenstein† N SAINT VALENTINE’S DAY, 1832, Spain executed one of its most prized prisoners, the pirate Don Jose Almeida. Before his capture in 1827, Almeida had ceaselessly molested Spanish merchant vessels for Omore than a dozen years. He haunted Spanish trade routes and ports of call in the West Indies and on many cruises he circled like a shark off the coast of Spain itself. There, Almeida preyed on gold-laden vessels clearing Cadiz and merchantmen returning with precious colonial cargo. The vessels he plundered numbered in the hundreds and were valued in the millions. The Spaniards jailed Almeida deep inside the vaults of “El Morro,” the menacing fortress that to this day dominates Puerto Rico’s northwest coast at San Juan Bay.
    [Show full text]
  • The Foreign Service Journal, April 1982
    The Fashoda Syndrome \ % oreign Service Joui % % 1.25 APRIL 1982 w Defend n Professionalism T.pttJ) 82 AMB. MALCOLM TOON SEN. CHARLES MATHIAS 'Slam a Door’ 'Pass a Law* Feel at home with security... AFSA Group Accident Insurance for Loss of Life, Limb or Sight. “Make yourself at home.” How often is heard that warm invitation to share the comfort and security of a friend's home. And though the surroundings may be unfamiliar, they somehow seem less foreign and more secure because your host is there to help protect you. Home is where the security is! Similarly, AFSA Group Accident Insurance for loss of life, limb or eye¬ sight provides that added security to make many of our members feel at home anywhere they happen to be. This AFSA program provides financial protection against accidental loss of life, limb or eyesight 24 hours a day, the year round, anywhere in the world. You and your family can be covered ACT NOW! Get all the facts about benefits, whether you're traveling by car, taxi, train, rates and exceptions .on AFSA Group boat, bus, subway and even as passengers Accident Protection for loss of life, limb or on most commercial, private and military eyesight—direct by mail! No agent will call. planes you’d normally travel in. Just complete the coupon below and mail Moreover, protection is provided during today. No obligation. So don’t delay on a business, pleasure and just plain day-to-day plan that can mean added security for you activities at home and abroad. and your family! AFSA INSURANCE PROGRAM UNDERWRITTEN BY 1666 Connecticut Ave.
    [Show full text]
  • George Washington Campbell Correspondence, 1793-1833
    State of Tennessee Department of State Tennessee State Library and Archives 403 Seventh Avenue North Nashville, Tennessee 37243-0312 GEORGE WASHINGTON CAMPBELL (1769-1848) CORRESPONDENCE 1793-1833 Processed by: Harriet Chappell Owsley Archival Technical Services Accession Numbers: 1246; 1256 Date Completed: October 28, 1964 Location: IV-F-4 INTRODUCTION This collection of papers (Photostats primarily) of George Washington Campbell (1769-1833), lawyer, Tennessee member of Congress, 1803-1809, U.S. Senator from Tennessee, 1811-1818, Secretary of the Treasury (briefly), Minister to Russia, 1818- 1820, and, U.S. Claims Commissioner, 1831, were given to the State by his descendants. Five original letters written by nephews of G.W. Campbell were also deposited by descendants. The materials in this finding aid measures .42 linear feet. There are no restrictions on the materials. Single photocopies of unpublished writings in the George Washington Campbell Correspondence may be made for purposes of scholarly research. SCOPE AND CONTENT This collection is composed of correspondence (Photostats and five original letters) of George Washington Campbell for the dates 1793-1833. The bulk of the material falls in the period 1813-1822 when Campbell was United States Senator, Secretary of the Treasury, and Minister to Russia. The letters are especially concerned with national and diplomatic problems involving the purchase of East Florida from Spain, diplomatic relations with Great Britain during the period of Jackson’s execution of Ambrister and Arbuthnot, conditions in France after the Revolution, treaties with European Countries, and subjects of national concern. His correspondents included four presidents – Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, James Monroe, and James Madison.
    [Show full text]
  • H. Doc. 108-222
    THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES 1789–2005 [ 43 ] TIME AND PLACE OF MEETING The Constitution (Art. I, sec. 4) provided that ‘‘The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year * * * on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.’’ Pursuant to a resolution of the Continental Congress the first session of the First Congress convened March 4, 1789. Up to and including May 20, 1820, eighteen acts were passed providing for the meet- ing of Congress on other days in the year. Since that year Congress met regularly on the first Mon- day in December until January 1934. The date for convening of Congress was changed by the Twen- tieth Amendment to the Constitution in 1933 to the 3d day of January unless a different day shall be appointed by law. The first and second sessions of the First Congress were held in New York City; subsequently, including the first session of the Sixth Congress, Philadelphia was the meeting place; since then Congress has convened in Washington, D.C. [ 44 ] FIRST CONGRESS MARCH 4, 1789, TO MARCH 3, 1791 FIRST SESSION—March 4, 1789, 1 to September 29, 1789 SECOND SESSION—January 4, 1790, to August 12, 1790 THIRD SESSION—December 6, 1790, to March 3, 1791 VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES—JOHN ADAMS, of Massachusetts PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE SENATE—JOHN LANGDON, 2 of New Hampshire SECRETARY OF THE SENATE—SAMUEL A. OTIS, 3 of Massachusetts DOORKEEPER OF THE SENATE—JAMES MATHERS, 4 of New York SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES—FREDERICK A.
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland Historical Magazine, 1942, Volume 37, Issue No. 3
    G ^ MARYLAND HISTORICAL MAGAZINE VOL. XXXVII SEPTEMBER, 1942 No. } BARBARA FRIETSCHIE By DOROTHY MACKAY QUYNN and WILLIAM ROGERS QUYNN In October, 1863, the Atlantic Monthly published Whittier's ballad, "' Barbara Frietchie." Almost immediately a controversy arose about the truth of the poet's version of the story. As the years passed, the controversy became more involved until every period and phase of the heroine's life were included. This paper attempts to separate fact from fiction, and to study the growth of the legend concerning the life of Mrs. John Casper Frietschie, nee Barbara Hauer, known to the world as Barbara Fritchie. I. THE HEROINE AND HER FAMILY On September 30, 1754, the ship Neptune arrived in Phila- delphia with its cargo of " 400 souls," among them Johann Niklaus Hauer. The immigrants, who came from the " Palatinate, Darmstad and Zweybrecht" 1 went to the Court House, where they took the oath of allegiance to the British Crown, Hauer being among those sufficiently literate to sign his name, instead of making his mark.2 Niklaus Hauer and his wife, Catherine, came from the Pala- tinate.3 The only source for his birthplace is the family Bible, in which it is noted that he was born on August 6, 1733, in " Germany in Nassau-Saarbriicken, Dildendorf." 4 This probably 1 Hesse-Darmstadt, and Zweibriicken in the Rhenish Palatinate. 2 Ralph Beaver Strassburger, Pennsylvania German Pioneers (Morristown, Penna.), I (1934), 620, 622, 625; Pennsylvania Colonial Records, IV (Harrisburg, 1851), 306-7; see Appendix I. 8 T. J. C, Williams and Folger McKinsey, History of Frederick County, Maryland (Hagerstown, Md., 1910), II, 1047.
    [Show full text]
  • The Full Story of U.S. V. Smith, America's Most Important Piracy Case
    University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Faculty Publications Law School 2012 The ulF l Story of U.S. v. Smith, America’s Most Important Piracy Case Joel H. Samuels University of South Carolina - Columbia, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/law_facpub Part of the International Law Commons, Rule of Law Commons, and the Transnational Law Commons Recommended Citation Joel H. Samuels, The Full Story of United States v. Smith, America’s Most Important Piracy Case, 1 Penn. St. J.L. & Int'l Aff. 320 (2012). This Article is brought to you by the Law School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Penn State Journal of Law & International Affairs Volume 1 | Issue 2 November 2012 The ulF l Story of United States v. Smith, America’s Most Important Piracy Case Joel H. Samuels ISSN: 2168-7951 Recommended Citation Joel H. Samuels, The Full Story of United States v. Smith, America’s Most Important Piracy Case, 1 Penn. St. J.L. & Int'l Aff. 320 (2012). Available at: http://elibrary.law.psu.edu/jlia/vol1/iss2/7 The Penn State Journal of Law & International Affairs is a joint publication of Penn State’s School of Law and School of International Affairs. Penn State Journal of Law & International Affairs 2012 VOLUME 1 NO. 2 THE FULL STORY OF UNITED STATES V. SMITH, AMERICA’S MOST IMPORTANT PIRACY CASE Joel H. Samuels* INTRODUCTION Many readers would be surprised to learn that a little- explored nineteenth-century piracy case continues to spawn core arguments in modern-day civil cases for damages ranging from environmental degradation in Latin America to apartheid-era investment in South Africa, as well as criminal trials of foreign terrorists.1 That case, United States v.
    [Show full text]
  • Pinkney Pinkaey "Set All the Idle World to Going to France." of Cal Supplies
    Pinkney Pinkaey "set all the idle world to going to France." Of cal supplies. After the war he took quite an ac­ relatives who achieved distinction perhaps the tive interest in politics. He had very definite best known were his uncle, William Pinkney ambitions about becoming the head of his corps, lq.v.Jt the lawyer, diplomatist, and statesman, but the fates were to deny him this honor. He and the poet, Edward Coote Pinkney [q.v.~], a retired on June 7,1873, with the rank of commo­ cousin. His brother William became Protestant dore, and settled with his wife and daughter in Episcopal Bishop of Maryland. Ninian Pinkney Easton, Md., in the house, "Londonderry," which was graduated from St John's College in An­ he himself had planned and built Here he died napolis in 1830, and from Jefferson Medical Col­ after a short illness, leaving his widow, Mary lege, Philadelphia, with the degree of M.D., in Sherwood Hambleton, and his only child, Amelia. 1833. The brilliant teacher of anatomy at Jeffer­ [Sources include: J. M. Toner, memoir in Trans. son, Granville Sharp Pattison, is said to have Am. Medic. Asso., vol. XXIX (1878) ; F. L. Pleadwell, looked upon Pinkney as his successor, but prob­ "Ninian Pinkney, M.D. (1811-1877)," Annals of Medic. Hist., Nov. 1929, Jan. 1930; War of the Rebel­ ably the glamour of travel and the certain income lion: Official Records (Navy), 1 ser. XXIV, XXV, and led him to the navy in which he was commis­ XXVI; D. D. Porter, Incidents and Anecdotes of the Civil War (1885) ; Orlando Hutton, Life of the Right sioned as assistant surgeon in 1834.
    [Show full text]
  • THE PRYOR FAMILY Virginia
    THE PRYOR FAMILY As published in Virginia Magazine of History and Biography Volume 7, Number 1, July 1899 Volume 7, Number 2, October 1899 Volume 7, Number 3, January 1900 [I added some names in brackets and numbering for children to improve clarity in reading] On account of the destruction of county records, this account of the PRYORs must be at present rather a collection of data than a connected and complete account of the family, though it is hoped the publication will elicit information which will enable it to be completed. The earliest land grant to one of the name is dated in 1689, to Mr. ROBERT PRYOR, for 309 acres at the head of Craney creek, Ware Parish, Gloucester County; 92 acres, of which, was granted to Thomas Jefferson (who is he?) April 1, 1668, and by him deserted and afterwards granted to Robert Collis, who on April 21, 1689 assigned to ROBERT PRYOR. On October 29, 1693, Mr. ROBERT PRYOR had a grant for 92 acres on Craney Creek, Gloucester. The next grants were much later, one October 15, 1741 to PHILIP PRYOR for 386 acres in Amelia County, between the branches of Great and Little Nottoway rivers, and another to WILLIAM PRYOR, September 5, 1762 for 350 acres in Amherst County, on Pedlar river. I am indebted to Judge James T. Mitchell, of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, for the following copy of an account prepared by his grandfather, James Mitchell, who was born in 1785 and died in 1869: Extract from notes in the Mitchell family Bible, made by James Mitchell from personal recollection and conversations, correspondence, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • H. Doc. 108-222
    FIFTY-NINTH CONGRESS MARCH 4, 1905, TO MARCH 3, 1907 FIRST SESSION—December 4, 1905, to June 30, 1906 SECOND SESSION—December 3, 1906, to March 3, 1907 SPECIAL SESSION OF THE SENATE—March 4, 1905, to March 18, 1905 VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES—CHARLES W. FAIRBANKS, of Indiana PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE SENATE—WILLIAM P. FRYE, of Maine SECRETARY OF THE SENATE—CHARLES G. BENNETT, of New York SERGEANT AT ARMS OF THE SENATE—DANIEL M. RANSDELL, of Indiana SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES—JOSEPH G. CANNON, 1 of Illinois CLERK OF THE HOUSE—ALEXANDER MCDOWELL, 2 of Pennsylvania SERGEANT AT ARMS OF THE HOUSE—HENRY CASSON, of Wisconsin DOORKEEPER OF THE HOUSE—FRANK B. LYON, of New York POSTMASTER OF THE HOUSE—J. C. MCELROY ALABAMA Joseph T. Robinson, Lonoke Herschel M. Hogg, Telluride SENATORS R. Minor Wallace, Magnolia At Large–Franklin E. Brooks, John T. Morgan, Selma Colorado Springs Edmund W. Pettus, Selma CALIFORNIA REPRESENTATIVES SENATORS CONNECTICUT George W. Taylor, Demopolis George C. Perkins, Oakland SENATORS Ariosto A. Wiley, Montgomery Frank P. Flint, Los Angeles Orville H. Platt, 6 Meriden Henry D. Clayton, Eufaula REPRESENTATIVES Frank B. Brandegee, 7 New London Sydney J. Bowie, Anniston James N. Gillett, 4 Eureka Morgan G. Bulkeley, Hartford J. Thomas Heflin, Lafayette 5 W. F. Englebright, Nevada City REPRESENTATIVES John H. Bankhead, Fayette Duncan E. McKinlay, Santa Rosa E. Stevens Henry, Rockville John L. Burnett, Gadsden Joseph R. Knowland, Alameda Nehemiah D. Sperry, New Haven William Richardson, Huntsville Julius Kahn, San Francisco Frank B. Brandegee, 8 New London O.
    [Show full text]