CHAPTER II.
BENCH AND BAR.

Page 2

WILLIAM HENRY BARTLETT^[1].--Beneath the shadow of Kearsage Mountain, in the historic town of Salisbury, the home of the Websters and Eastmans and Bartletts and Pettingills, William Henry Bartlett was born, August 20, 1827. He was the youngest child of Samuel Colcord and Eleanor Pettingill Bartlett. His father was noted for his vigorous mind, his great activity and strict integrity; his mother for the sweetness of her character, her gentleness and dignity of manner, and strong, womanly sense; both for their pure Christian lives and characters. He was the nephew of Ichabod Bartlett, of Portsmouth, the cotemporary at the bar of Mason and Smith and Webster, and the peer of either in learning and eloquence. The son of such parents could not fail to receive the impress of their virtues and characters. He was recognized by all as an interesting child, and a boy of great promise, both in mind and character. Without precocity, he was singularly quick of apprehension, and equally patient and painstaking. While in the common school, and afterwards at the academy, he would come with his arithmetic or algebra, and, of his own accord, sit by the hour working at his problems, till it was found necessary to send him to his sports. He never lost that habit of protracted toil to the end of his life. Perhaps the end was hastened by the excess. Meanwhile, from his childhood, his scholarship was of the highest order. In his earlier school-days he was associated in classes with much older persons than he, and proved himself fully their equal. But neither then nor afterwards did his proficiency create in him the slightest aspect of arrogance or conceit; but he remained to the end as modest as he was bright and strong.

His childhood and boyhood were marked by an extremely kind, obliging and winning disposition. At home he was helpful and uniformly cheerful and obliging. It was a marked and peculiar trait in his character, and steadily deepened into that thoughtful kindness which, in after years, gained him such unbroken and universal love.

Young Bartlett entered Meriden Academy at the age of thirteen, and at fifteen had completed his preparation for college. His friends considered him too young; but not seeing how else to occupy him, consented, and in the fall of 1842 he entered the freshman class in this college. The modest and diffident Bartlett--the youngest member, with possibly a single exception--soon became, by universal and cheerful acknowledgment, the leader of his class in point of scholarship. We were classmates; and I have no hesitation in saying, I do not know that I ever met a finer scholar, and seldom have I encountered a brighter or stronger intellect. He had a singular quickness to perceive, a powerful memory to retain, and a breadth and grasp that subordinated every detail to the whole, and extracted order out of complication. The modesty with which he bore his academic honors was only equaled by the sincere affection with which he was regarded by his classmates.

At the request of his brother Samuel, he left college during his sophomore year, and pursued his studies with him at Monson, Mass. There he remained nearly a year, applying himself with his usual diligence, and endearing himself in the community, so that the pleasant memory of him there has not been lost to the present time. He entered the next college class, graduating in the first rank in 1847. The �Prophetic Power of Genius� was the subject of his oration at commencement. Those who knew him best felt that no prophet was needed to estimate his maturer character or to anticipate his eminent success in whatever calling he might pursue.

At the time of his graduation his brother Samuel filled a professor�s chair in Western Reserve College; and, as he was still quite young, it, was thought best that he should spend a year of more general study before entering upon his professional career. He accordingly joined a class of graduate students in that college, and spent a highly profitable year in the study of history, the German language and the Greek dramatic poets. Here again his scholarship and personal qualities made a deep and permanent impression on his teachers and associates, so that they ever remembered him with a warm personal interest.

He entered upon the study of the law in Concord in the office of Chief Justice Perley in 1818, and remained with Judge Perley till he went upon the bench, in 1850, and afterwards completed his course of preparation with Chief Justice Bellows, then in practice at Concord, and was admitted to the bar in Merrimack County July 9, 1851. How he impressed those eminent jurists by his fine scholarship, studious habits, ingenuous disposition and legal attainments is best told in the language of Judge Perley, written soon after the death of Judge Bartlett: �Few men,� wrote Judge Perley, �have excelled him in quickness of apprehension; and this was a general trait of his mind, observable in whatever he undertook, in his classical and mathematical studies, in the law, and even in any amusement or recreation in which he might be led to indulge. There was a playful ease in his way of doing the most difficult things, which made them look more like an amusement or a pastime than an irksome labor. With all his dispatch, he was distinguished for accuracy and correctness. It was very seldom that he fell into any mistake or blunder. His memory was also tenacious and exact. In the law he united two things which are not often found together in the same individual,--a perfect mastery of principles, with great and ready recollection of points and authorities.�

His relations to Judge Perley were most intimate and delightful,--in some respects the relation of equals; in others, almost of father and son.

His admirable collegiate training, supplemented by two years of special instruction under the immediate eye of his learned brother, and his study of the law under two such eminent legal minds as Judges Perley and Bellows, prepared him to enter upon the practice of the law with success assured. We are not therefore surprised to find him at once taking his place in the front ranks of the profession, and entrusted with a business important not only in the amounts involved, but especially because of the legal principles to be examined and applied. From the start he gave promise of becoming eminent in the profession, and his subsequent career demonstrated how well he was appreciated and understood by those who watched his entrance upon professional life. For several years he held the office of city solicitor of Concord, and with what acceptance is best shown by repeated re-elections without substantial opposition. The rugged discipline of ten years� practice in the courts of New Hampshire afforded him an admirable school of training for the faithful and honorable discharge of his subsequent duties upon the bench. In 1857 his health, until then apparently perfect, became impaired, and thenceforward to his death, ten years afterwards, his work at the bar and upon the bench was done while struggling against the inroads of unrelenting disease. His overtasked physical frame was shattered but his intellect shone unclouded to the end.

While his success in the profession was assured, it is not claimed that he did or would have taken the first rank as an advocate. As Judge Perley puts it, "It is not impossible that he might have been found wanting in a certain boldness and confidence of manner and style which would now seem to be thought requisite in those who aspire to take the lead in that turbulent and noisy department of our profession.�

Owing to the logical cast of his mind, he appeared to best advantage in matters of special pleading, in the preparation of briefs and in the investigation and argument of questions of law before the court in banc. The more difficult the question, the greater delight he seemed to take in its solution. He was often consulted by his brethren upon questions in regard to which they were in doubt, and frequently wrote opinions for their guidance.

His high sense of professional honor led him to regard the profession as an office, and not as a trade. Accordingly, to witnesses he was fair and respectful; to the bench he was deferential without being obsequious; and to his professional brethren he was dignified and courteous. As Judge Curtis said of Rufus Choate, �He showed that forensic strife is consistent with uniform personal kindness and gentleness of demeanor; that mere smartness, or aggressive and irritating captiousness, has nothing to do with the most effective conduct of a cause; that the business of an advocate is with the law and the evidence, and not in provoking or humbling an opponent; that wrangling, and the irritations which spring from it, obstruct the course of justice, and are indeed twice cursed, for they injure him who gives and him who receives.�

Judge Bartlett was a lawyer of great research. He seemed to have an instinctive clinging to authorities. He could find readily what others could not. He had a great mastery of cases, such as few ever have; but he was not a case lawyer. He had a legal instinct or genius by which he could extract, from what to others seemed a chaos of conflicting decisions, the true legal principle, and put it in the smallest possible compass. He distilled the spirit from the dilution, appropriating the gold and rejecting the dross.

It must not be inferred that he was not positive in his opinions, or was not sufficiently firm in maintaining opinions deliberately formed. We have on this point the testimony of Judge Perley, that �he had nothing of that facility which yields in substantial matters to importunity and over-persuasion. He was very firm in his opinions and judgments when once formed, and perfectly fearless in acting on them when duty appeared to require it.�

We come now to the period when he "put off the gown of the bar to assume the more graceful and reverend ermine of the bench.� In 1861 a vacancy occurred upon the bench of the Supreme Court of New Hampshire. The foremost lawyers of the State refused to be candidates, because they understood that he might be persuaded to accept the appointment. In obedience to the united voice of the profession, he was at once (February 23,1861) appointed associate justice. The court at that time consisted of Bell, chief justice, and Sargent, Bellows, Doe and Nesmith, associate justices. No change occurred in the composition of the court while Judge Bartlett lived, except the reappointment of Judge Perley as chief justice upon the resignation of Judge Bell in 1864. At no period in the history of the State has there been a stronger court. Five of the six judges with whom he was associated have held the office of chief justice. His selection from a bar containing so many lawyers of established reputation, to be the associate of judges of such eminent ability, shown in what estimation his legal attainments and qualifications were held.

Rufus Choate thus describes the qualifications of the good judge: "In the first place, he should be profoundly learned in all the learning of the law, and he must know how to use that learning. . . . In the next place, he must be a man not merely upright, not merely honest and well-intentioned,--this, of course,--but a man who will not respect persons in judgment. . . . And, finally, he must possess the perfect confidence of the community, that he bear not the sword in vain. To be honest, to be no respecter of persons, is not enough. He must be believed such.� We shall see how well Judge Bartlett answered these requirements

His legal learning was profound. He had an extraordinary genius for learning everything quickly and accurately, and remembering it during life, and without effort. We have shining and encouraging examples of what can be done by men of moderate abilities. Judge Bartlett was not of that class, and, therefore, as an example, he is worth far less than many others. As a brilliant legal scholar, a brilliant legal thinker and practical logician, capable of applying ancient legal principles to the facts of new cases, and working out for the benefit of modern life the best results of that common law that has been constantly growing out of the last thousand years of English and American civilization, he was not surpassed by any one judge who has sat upon the bench of New Hampshire. It is not uncommon for a man of intellect to succeed in mastering much of the special doctrine and general theory of the law, and to fail as a practicing lawyer and working judge from a lack of ability rightly to apply his learning to the varying and novel circumstances that constitute most of the cases that are carried to the office of a lawyer and to the courts of justice. Nearly infallible as Judge Bartlett was in his opinion on an abstract question of law, he equally excelled in perceiving what rule was applicable to each case. His remarkable powers were equally accurate in theory and practice.

All great lawyers are naturally conservative; so was Judge Bartlett. Generally inclined to follow precedents, he was strong enough to disregard them when they disregarded fundamental principles. Witness his opinion in Bassett v. Salisbury Manufacturing Company, 43 N. H. 569. The action was case for maintaining a dam, thereby causing water to percolate through the plaintiff�s meadow. On the fifth jury trial, the present chief justice presided, and ruled the law in accordance with the English case of Acton v. Blundell, 12 M. & W. 324, and numerous cases that followed in its train. The cause was carried to the full bench on exceptions, and an opinion prepared affirming the ruling of the court below, which received the assent of a majority of the court; but the judge who drew up the opinion resigned, and the cause was continued for further examination, and assigned to Judge Bartlett, who succeeded him upon the bench. Few cases have received such careful consideration (50 N. H. 444). Four opinions were drawn up by different members of the court, of which three sustained the English doctrine. The opinion published in the reports was drawn up by Judge Bartlett, at the sea-shore, when in feeble health and hardly able to be about. It reversed the English authorities, those of a majority of the States, the decision of the court below and the opinions of all his associates except one; yet, when read in consultation, every judge yielded his objections and assented to the opinion, because it was found unanswerable. But for him, the contrary erroneous doctrine would have been established in New Hampshire. The logic of the opinion, and its clear and precise style, are only equaled by the modesty which marked his dissent, from the English and American authorities.

As illustrating his way of summing up a case and instructing a jury, I might cite Hayes v. Waldron, 44 N. H. 580, where his charge is fully reported, and so admirably and clearly did it set forth the law of the case, that little was left for the judge who delivered the opinion in banc except to adopt the reasoning and substance of the charge.

The decisions of the court, written and delivered by him, will be his lasting monument. Models of brevity, of perspicuous statement and logical deduction, of legal thought, and literary, unornamented style, they will endure. But they are very brief. Those that are published are but a small part of his work, and will carry to other generations a very inadequate idea of how much was lost at his decease. His associates at the bay and on the bench, who enjoyed the benefits of a personal acquaintance with him, and felt the refreshing power of his fellowship; will never lose the benefit of his personal influence, nor cease to grieve that he did not live to lead them to the end of their labors. It was not an uncommon thing for him, whether he delivered the judgment or not, to cause a decision to be put upon ground not thought of by other members of the court or by counsel. His learning was so complete, and his grasp of the law and facts so comprehensive, that while he seldom changed in consultation an opinion he had formed in his library, other members of the court not infrequently found occasion to correct theirs by the light of his expositions.

Judge Perley says of him,--"When he went upon the bench, his high qualifications for the office were at once recognized by the legal profession. His youthful appearance, his unpretending manners and his easy and rapid way of dispatching business might have led a careless observer to fear that he would be found wanting in solidity and soundness of judgment; but the character of his mind was eminently judicial. His examination of authority in cases which required it was faithful and exhaustive. He weighed conflicting arguments and reasons with equal impartiality. He had great sagacity in perceiving the practical bearing of any question under consideration, and its connection with the whole complete system of the law; and his opinions and rulings were received with the greatest respect and deference by the legal profession throughout the State. In presiding over trials, I never learned that he was known, in the most irritating circumstances, to lose the sweetness and equanimity of his own temper, and he often had the rare felicity of winning from both sides the commendation of perfect fairness and impartiality.�

Judge Bartlett never failed to show that he had the courage of his convictions whenever the occasion called for it. Witness his action upon the Soldiers� Voting Bill, so called, introduced in 1863 in the midst of political excitement, when he united with three other members of the court in an opinion which set aside the act as a violation of the constitution.

In 1866 was passed, under similar circumstances, an act disfranchising deserters from the army, the constitutionality of which was brought before the full bench. Not long before his death he drew up an opinion setting aside this act, also, as a plain violation of the fundamental law of the land. The fact in some way came to the knowledge of the Legislature, which forthwith did itself and him the honor to repeal the law before the opinion could be read in court.

History tells us that the celebrated court of the Areopagus, when Athens was at the height of its civilization, sat in the dark, that the judges might not see or know who were the suitors, and so be enabled to dispense impartial justice. I suppose for the same reason the Goddess of Justice is represented with eyes blindfolded, that her hand may feel the "trepidations of the balance,� uninfluenced by the presence or appearance of the contending parties. All systems of judicial tenure suppose judges to be imperfect because mortal. The constitution recognizes this in that clause which secures the right to the subject �to be tried by judges as impartial as the lot of humanity will admit.�

But I do not hesitate to say, that if there ever was a judge who was a living personification of the blindfold goddess; one who watched not the faces of his suitors, to inquire who they were, or what their standing or influence, but only the movements of the scales held in an even hand; one who, unlike his ancient brethren of Athens, had no need to sit in the dark, because wholly oblivious to all surrounding circumstances; one who, when a whole city, Athens-like, came �to demand that the cup of hemlock be put to the lips of the wisest of men,� would deliver him if he believed he �had not corrupted the youth, nor omitted to worship the gods of the city, nor introduced new divinities of his own,�such an one was Judge Bartlett.

His good-fellowship placed him on terms of intimacy with his brethren of the bar; but no one presumed, on the strength of former intimacy, or of close and friendly relations, to influence his rulings or decisions; or, if any one did so far forget himself, the success of the attempt was not such as to encourage its repetition.

It must not be inferred that, while he was noted for his patient, courteous and urbane manners, he was tolerant of fraud, or failed to rebuke chicanery or improper interference with the course of justice. On such occasion he

The testimony of one of his associates^[2] upon the bench affords a fitting close to this review of Judge Bartlett�s judicial life,

   "His career wax brief, but it was long enough to satisfy those who knew him best, and whose judgment was trustworthy, that, with life and health, he would have become the great American jurist of his generation. No mental or moral weakness impaired the operation or influence of his great powers.
   �There have been great men who were not loved, and did not deserve to be loved. There have been good men who were not great. Here was a man equally great and good; equally superior by nature on the intellectual and on the moral side. Incapable of selfishness, envy or any meanness, whole-souled in the best sense, incapable of uttering an unkind word or entertaining an unkind feeling, he would have had only pity for his enemies, if it had been possible for him to have an enemy. He had neither a single enemy, nor a single cold or indifferent friend. He involuntarily held all whom he met, bound to him by those ties of affection which draw all men to a character the most amiable and lovely as well as by those ties of reverence which draw all men to mental supremacy. With health and life, what a judge he would have become! And, what is so much more to be said, with health and life, what a teacher and leader of youth--what a head of an educational institution--he would have been! Where he presided, there was no thought of legal power provided for the maintenance of judicial dignity. In him all men recognized the unconscious majesty of the law, and the unconscious majesty of whatever is greatest and best in human nature. With such as he in many places of government and personal control, it would not be too much to hope that the word �discipline,� in the sense that is often disagreeable and offensive, might become obsolete.�

There is another aspect of Judge Bartlett�s character which, although already considered to some extent, because so closely interwoven with his intel-lectual character, yet remains to be spoken of. I allude to his moral and Christian virtues. Ha was valued more for his character than for his intellect. He was witty, bright and genial, faithful and judicious; a thoughtful friend, a self-denying brother, a most affectionate son and husband. His professional life was passed in the near vicinity of his native town; and, in their declining years, the hearts of his parents turned much and constantly to him for sympathy and kindly care, and never were they disappointed. He visited and wrote to them often; and for years, whatever were his engagements, almost never did a Monday pass without bringing them an affectionate letter. And during the last months of his life, it was an occasion of almost uncontrollable grief to him that he had been frustrated of being present to comfort the last hours of his father not long before.

In his own home he seemed to be whatever a host and a husband ought to be.^[3] So warmly was he attached to his home, and to her who was its star and its light, that he was loath to leave it, even when called away by professional engagements. The one trait that fixes itself most deeply in the memory of his friends is the kindly spirit that, in his maturer years, followed him in all his relations, and made him always considerate of the feelings, and actively attentive to the wants, of all around him. It was a pleasure to him to make others happy; and he loved to do a kind office to those who could not repay. It seems, as we look back upon it, the practical benevolence of the gospel. He became a diligent and deeply-interested reader of the Scriptures; and to those who knew him best, he seemed to exemplify the spirit of the gospel in a most important aspect.

At the close of the summer of 1867 he returned to his home from the sea-shore, without having been benefited by the invigorating air of the ocean. For a few days he struggled cheerfully against physical weakness and disease,--more for the sake of others, perhaps, than for himself,--his pallid countenance illumined as with the lustre of a beautiful spirit. On Tuesday, September 24th, as gently as a child falls asleep, without pain or a struggle, consciousness preserved to the last moment, that life, which had been so noble and beautiful, changed its course, as a river, to a smoother channel, and put on immortality. Three days later, on a bright and beautiful day in early autumn, his professional brethren, representing nearly every county in the State, and the surviving members of the court, with his inconsolable relatives, in tenderness committed to his mother earth all that was mortal of him who had been a dutiful child, a quick and ready scholar, a profound lawyer, an upright magistrate, an affectionate brother and devoted husband, to rest till the resurrection morning.

IRA PERLEY was born in Boxford, Mass., November 9, 1799. He graduated from Dartmouth College in the class of 1822 and was tutor in that institution from 1823 to 1825. He read law with Benjamin J. Gilbert, of Hanover, and commenced practice in that town in 1827. Here he remained until 1834, when he removed to Concord, where he resided until his death.

Upon his removal to Concord he soon acquired a large practice, and ranked among the leaders at the Merrimack bar. In July, 1850, he was appointed a justice in the Superior Court of this State, which position he held until October, 1852, when he resigned and resumed the practice of law. In 1855 he was appointed chief-justice of the Supreme Judicial Court, and held the position until 1859, when he resigned and again resumed the practice of law. In 1864 he was appointed chief justice of the same court, and held the position until September, 1869.

Judge Perley had no taste for political office, but served at three different times as a member of the House of Representatives,--first from Hanover in 1834 and from Concord in 1839 and 1870. He received the degree of LL.D. from Dartmouth College in 1852. He manifested an interest in historical matters, and for several years was an active member of the New Hampshire Historical Society and was vice-president of the New England Historic Genealogical Society at the time of his death.

As a scholar, Judge Perley ranked among the foremost in the State and in New England. He kept up his interest in classics to the day of his death, and read German, French and Italian with readiness. In social life he was modest and unassuming, but was nevertheless a rare conversationalist.

In January, 1840, he united in marriage with Mary L. Nelson, of Haverhill. Judge Perley died February 26, 1874.

JOHN Y. MUGRIDGE was born in Laconia, N. H., then a part of Meredith, April 16, 1832. He received his preparatory education at the Gilford Academy and commenced the study of the law in the office of Colonel Thomas J. Whipple, in Laconia. He concluded his studies with the late Hon. Asa Fowler, of Concord, with whom he formed a copartnership for the practice of his profession soon after his admission to the bar, in 1854. He was subsequently in partnership with Hon. Josiah Minot and later with Hon. Mason W. Tappan, but, at the time of his death was alone in practice. Mr. Mugridge never sought political preference, but devoted himself almost entirely to his profession. He served as city solicitor from 1861 to 1868, was a representative in the Legislature in 1863 and 1864, Senator from the old Fourth District in 1868 and 1869, being president of the Senate the latter year, and again representative in 1875.

As a lawyer Mr. Mugridge held a commanding position at the Merrimack bar, and probably enjoyed a more extensive practice than any other man in the county, especially excelling in criminal cases. He was a man of great personal popularity, had a large heart, full of generous impulses, and he gave them free course in all the relations of life. He was a Republican in politics.

HON. ASA FOWLER.--The origin of the name and the antiquity of the family of Fowler in England have never been ascertained. It is probable, from the large number of families of that name known to have existed in various sections of that country early in the sixteenth century, and the high standing of some of them, that the name was adopted soon after surnames came to be used. Edward Fowler, eldest son and heir of Sir Richard Q. Fowler, is said to have entertained Queen Catharine of Arragon at his manor, near Buckingham, in September, 1514. Fronde, in his �History of England,� vol. v. pp. 129 and 131, mentions John Fowler, a member, in 1547, of the household of King Edward VI., who was so influential with that young monarch that he was employed by Lord Seymour to secure the royal assent to his contemplated marriage with the Princess, afterwards Queen, Elizabeth, and subsequently the royal approval of his already secretly accomplished marriage with Catharine Parr, widow of Henry VIII. Christopher Fowler, an English clergyman, born in 1611, left the Established Church in 1641 and joined the Presbyterians, among whom he became eminent, and died in 1676. John Fowler, a learned printer, born in Bristol, removed his press to Antwerp more effectually to aid the Catholics, and died in 1579. Edward Fowler, born at Westerleigh in 1632, was distinguished as a divine, published a discourse on "The Design of Christianity� in 1676, which Bunyan attacked, and another on �Christian Liberty� in 1680; was made bishop of Gloucester in 1691, and died in 1714. William Fowler, born about 1560,--died in 1614,--was one of the poets that frequented the court of James VI., whose works have been preserved. He was a lawyer and clergyman, as well as a poet.

The Fowlers in this country, now quite numerous, as their namesakes were in England three centuries ago, and are still more so at the present day, sprang from several different pioneer ancestors who emigrated to America from various parts of England at different periods, and, so far as known, were in no way related to each other. The subject of this sketch is of the sixth generation in lineal descent from one of the founders of New England, the common ancestor of the great majority of the Fowlers in Massachusetts, and of most, if not all, of those in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont.^[4]

Philip Fowler, Sr., born about 1590 in the ancient town of Marlborough, in the county of Wiltshire, England, where no less than five families of Fowlers are shown by the records to have been living contemporaneously early in the seventeenth century, came from thence with his family to Massachusetts in 1634 in the ship �Mary and John,� of London, having taken the oath of allegiance and supremacy to qualify him as a passenger at Southampton on the 24th of March. He must have embarked in February, since, by an order of Council, dated February 24th, the vessel was detained in the Thames until the captain gave bond in one hundred pounds, conditional, among other things, that the service of the Church of England should be read daily on board and attended by the passengers, and also that the adult male passengers should take the oath of allegiance and supremacy. All this having been done, the ship was allowed to proceed on her voyage, but did not reach New England until May. September 3, 1634, he was admitted freeman at Boston; obtained a grant of land in Ipswich the same year, on which he settled in 1635, and where he resided until his death, on the 24th of June, 1679, at the age of eighty-eight. During his long life he made a variety of records, but none that any descendant need blush to read. It is remarkable that his homestead in Ipswich has ever since been, and still is, occupied by one of his descendants bearing the family name. His wife, Mary, mother of his children, died August 30, 1659, and he again married, February 27, 1660, Mary, widow of George Norton, early of Salem, afterwards Representative from Gloucester. There came over in the same ship with Philip Fowler, Sr., and family, his daughter, Margaret, and her husband, Christopher Osgood, whom she had married the previous year, and who was the common ancestor of most of the Osgoods of Massachusetts and New Hampshire.

Joseph Fowler, son of Philip, Sr., born in England, date unknown, married, in Ipswich, Mass., Martha Kimball, who came over from Ipswich, England, in 1634, in the ship � Elizabeth,� with her parents, and is stated to have been then five years of age. Her father, Richard Kimball, settled in Ipswich, Mass., and is believed to have been the ancestor of nearly all the Kimballs in this country. His wife, Ursula Scott, was the daughter of the widow Martha Scott, who came over with the Kimballs at the age of sixty, supposed to have been the wife of Hon. John Scott, of Scott's Hall, Kent County, England. Joseph Fowler was killed by the Indians near Deerfield, Mass., May 19, 1676, on his return from the Falls fight. He was a tanner by trade.

Philip Fowler (second), eldest son of Joseph, was born in Ipswich, Mass., December 25, 1648. When only two or three years of age, he was adopted, with the consent of his parents, by his grandfather, Philip, Sr., who made him his heir by deed dated December 23, 1668. He received the rudiments of his education at the famous school kept by Ezekiel Cheever. He was a man of superior ability, and as a merchant, deputy marshal and attorney quite distinguished. He acquired a large landed estate, which he divided by deeds of gift among his four sons, a valuable farm to each. He married, January 20, 1674, Elizabeth Herrick, born about July 4, 1647. He died November 16, 1715. His wife died May 6, 1727. She was the daughter of Henry and Editha (Laskin) Herrick. Henry Herrick, born at Bean Manor in 1604, was the son of Sir William Herrick, and came from Leicester, England, to Salem, Mass., where he arrived June 24, 1629.

Philip Fowler (third), ninth child of Philip (second), was born in Ipswich, Mass., in October, 1691; married there, July 5, 1716, Susanna Jacob, daughter of Joseph and Susanna (Symonds) Jacob, and great-granddaughter of Deputy Governor Samuel Symonds, of that town. He is reported to have fitted for Harvard College, but did not enter, engaging instead in trade and carrying on the tanning business, until he sold out and removed to New Market, N. H., in May, 1743, where he died May 16, 1767. His widow died there in 1773. Before removing to New Market he purchased of his brother-in-law, Joseph Jacob, for the consideration of two thousand pounds, two hundred and thirty-six acres of land in �New Market, in the township of Exeter and province of New Hampshire, with two houses and two barns thereon.� The deed is dated February 14, 1737. For fifty-six acres of this land, including the homestead, he was sued by Josiah Hilton in 1760, and after two trials, one in the Common Pleas and the other in the Superior Court, both resulting in verdicts in Fowler�s favor, Hilton appealed to the Governor and Council, some of whom were directly interested in the event of the suit as lessors of the plaintiff, and they, in 1764, rendered judgment in favor of Hilton, from which the defendant appealed to the King in Council and furnished bonds to prosecute his appeal in England. The Governor and Council granted this appeal, which vacated their judgment, and then at once issued a writ of possession founded thereon, upon which Fowler was turned out of the land and compelled to pay costs. He had executed his will May 22, 1754, therein devising his large landed estate to his three sons,--Philip, Jacob and Symonds,--and requiring them to pay legacies to his daughters. The land in controversy with Hilton was devised to the two former sons. The appeal was prosecuted in England by the father and these devisees until after the Declaration of American Independence, and in 1777 the Legislature of New Hampshire passed an act authorizing these devisees to bring an action of review in the Superior Court for Rockingham County to determine the title to this land. Such action was brought by them, and at the September term, 1778, of that court, they recovered judgment for the land, costs of court and costs of former litigation. On the 14th of September, 1778, the sheriff put them into possession of the property from which their father had been wrongfully ejected fourteen years before. Sarah, daughter of Philip, one of these sons, was the wife of Governor William Plumer and the mother of his children.

Symonds Fowler, the tenth of fourteen children of Philip (third), born in Ipswich, Mass., August 20, 1734, removed to New Market, N. H., with his father, in 1743, where he married, July 12, 1756, Hannah Weeks, born in the old brick house in Greenland, N. H., August 12, 1738. By the will of his father he inherited a farm adjoining the station at New Market Junction, on the Concord and Portsmouth and Boston and Maine Railroads, upon which he lived until he removed, in 1778, to a farm in the western part of Epsom, N. H., upon Suncook River, where he resided until his death, April 6, 1821. His wife, Hannah, died there December 9, 1807.

Benjamin Fowler, the sixth of eleven children of Symonds, was born at New Market, N. H., June 16, 1769; removed with his father to Epsom, N. H., in 1778; married in Pembroke, N. H., January 15, 1795, Mehitable Ladd, only child of John and Jerusha (Lovejoy) Ladd, of that town, and granddaughter of Captain Trueworthy and Mehitable (Harriman) Ladd, of Kingston, N. H. He settled in Pembroke, after his marriage, on a farm he purchased, and died there July 24, 1832. His widow survived him until September 9. 1853.

Asa Fowler, the ninth of eleven children of Benjamin and Mehitable (Ladd) Fowler, was born in Pembroke, N. H., February 23, 1811. His childhood was spent on his father�s farm, his means of education after he was seven or eight years of age being limited to eight or nine weeks of winter school, his services after that age in summer being required in farmwork. There were very few books to which he had access, except the Bible and ordinary schoolbooks, and his early reading was confined to these. At the age of fourteen he had a very severe attack of typhoid fever, which left him in such enfeebled condition as to be incapable of severe manual labor. Under these circumstances he was sent to the Blanchard Academy, in his native town, then under the charge of Hon. John Vose, but with no other intention than that he might become qualified to instruct a common district school. But with opportunity to learn and to read, a desire for a liberal education was awakened, and, by alternately working upon his father�s farm in the spring and summer, attending the academy in the fall and teaching school in winter, he succeeded in not only fitting himself for college, but in preparing to enter the sophomore class, having attended school only sixty weeks after he commenced the study of Latin. With so meagre and defective a training, he entered the sophomore class at Dartmouth College at the opening of the fall term, 1830, and although he taught school every winter, was able, nevertheless, to maintain a highly respectable standing until his graduation, in 1833, when, among the parts assigned to the graduating class according to scholarship, an English oration was given him. He was never absent or unprepared at any recitation during his three years� course. In his junior year he was elected a member of the Phi Beta Kappa Society, as being in the first third of his class. He has never sought or received any honorary degree from his Alma Mater. After leaving college he taught the academy at Topsfield, Mass., for a single term in the fall of 1833, thereby raising sufficient funds to liquidate all indebtedness incurred to defray his college expenses, over and above what he received from his father�s estate. Immediately upon leaving Topsfield, having determined to adopt the legal profession, he entered his name as a student in the office of James Sullivan, Esq., then in practice in Pembroke, occupying the office of the Hon. Boswell Stevens, disabled by a paralytic attack, from which he never recovered. He continued to read books from Mr. Sullivan�s library through the following winter. In March, 1834, he came to Concord, N. H., where he has since resided, and entered the office of Hon. Charles H. Peaslee, then a rising young lawyer, and continued with him until admitted to the Merrimack County bar, in February, 1837. While a student in General Peaslee�s office, he and Hon. Moody Currier, then a teacher in Concord, undertook the editorship, as a matter of amusement and with no hope of pecuniary reward, of a small literary paper, called the Literary Gazette. It was published weekly for six months, and then once a fortnight for another six months. After Mr. Currier retired from the editorship, Cyrus P. Bradley, a youth of wonderful precocity, and the author, when a mere boy, of a �Life of Governor Isaac Hill,� became associated with Mr. Fowler in the management of the Gazette. During a considerable portion of the period in which he pursued the study of the law, Mr. Fowler supported himself by writing for other papers. In June, 1835, he was elected clerk of the New Hampshire Senate, which office he continued to hold by annual elections for six successive years, discharging its duties to universal satisfaction. In 1846 he was appointed by the Hon. Levi Woodbury United States commissioner for the district of New Hampshire, which office he held at the time of his death. In 1845 he was a member of the New Hampshire House of Representatives from Concord and served as chairman of the judiciary committee. Again, in 1847 and 1848, he was one of the Representatives of Concord in that body and served upon the same committee in both years. In 1855 he was nominated by the Independent Democrats, or Free-Soilers, as their candidate for Governor, and was frequently assured by prominent Know-Nothings that if he would join their order he might and would be made their candidate, also; but he was deaf to all such suggestions. After that party came into power and decided to change the judiciary system of tho State, he was engaged to draft the bill for that purpose, which subsequently became a law. Afterwards, at the earnest and repeated solicitation of Governor Metcalf, although at first, he absolutely declined to do so, he accepted a position on the bench of the Supreme Court as associate justice, which he continued to hold, at a great pecuniary sacrifice, from August 1, 1855, to February 1, 1861, when he voluntarily resigned it. During this period of five and a half years he performed his full share of the arduous labors of a judge of our highest judicial tribunal, and gave general satisfaction to the bar and the public. If his opinions at the law terms as reported are not so labored as those of some of his associates, they are more numerous and not less sound and clear.

Immediately upon his resignation, Judge Fowler was appointed by the Governor and Council a delegate from New Hampshire to the Peace Congress, which met in Washington in February, 1861, for the purpose of averting, if possible, the threatened secession of the Southern States from the Union, and continued its sessions through the entire month. His associate delegates were Hon. Levi Chamberlain, of Keene, and Hon. Amos Tuck, of Exeter. In 1861 he was appointed solicitor for the county of Merrimack, and held the office until he resigned, in 1865, upon his being appointed one of the commissioners to revise the statutes of the State. He was associated in that commission with Hon. Samuel D. Bell, of Manchester, and Hon. George Y. Sawyer, of Nashua. Upon it he labored diligently and successfully, alone superintending the printing of the commissioners� report, and, subsequently, the printing of the General Statutes as finally adopted by the Legislature of 1867. He also attended almost constantly, during the whole period of that Legislature, upon the sessions of the joint select committee to whom the report of the commissioners was referred, and greatly aided in procuring the speedy action of that committee, and the final adoption of the report of the commissioners, as amended by the General Court, without protracting the session beyond its usual length. In 1871 and again in 1872, Judge Fowler was a member of the House of Representatives from Ward Six, in Concord, serving on the judiciary committee in 1871, and presiding over the deliberations of the House, as Speaker, in 1872, with dignity, impartiality and complete success.

Judge Fowler was one of the most diligent, laborious and successful lawyers in the State, and the extent of his practice for many years has rarely been exceeded. In September, 1838, after practicing alone for a year and a half, he formed a co-partnership with the late President Pierce, which continued until April, 1845. During this period of six years and a half, their practice was probably as extensive as that of any individual or firm in the State. General Pierce engaged in the trial of causes as an advocate in nearly every county, while Judge Fowler attended chiefly to office business, the preparation of causes for trial and briefs for argument at the law terms of court. Hon. John Y. Mugridge completed his preparatory studies in Judge Fowler�s office, and upon his admission to the bar, in 1854, Judge Fowler formed a business connection with him for one year, which expired about the time of Judge Fowler�s appointment to the bench. Soon after his resignation of the judgeship, in 1861, he entered into partnership with Hon. William E. Chandler, which continued until Mr. Chandler�s appointment as Solicitor of the Navy, in 1864.

During his long residence in Concord, Judge Fowler was quite familiar with the forms of legislation, and probably drafted more bills for our Legislature than any other man, living or dead. He originated many laws and procured their enactment, when not a member of the Legislature. Among those thus originated and procured to be enacted may be mentioned the statute authorizing school districts to unite for the purpose of maintaining High Schools, and that authorizing towns to establish and maintain public libraries. He worked zealously with General Peaslee to secure the establishment of the Asylum for the Insane, was very active and persistent in securing the establishment of a Public Library in Concord and a High School in Union District. He always showed a deep interest in the cause of public education, and for more than twenty successive years served as prudential committee or a member of the Board of Education in Concord. He was always fond of literary pursuits, and has an extensive and well-selected miscellaneous library. For the last three or four years of his life he belonged to a class in English Literature, whose weekly meetings, during the winter season, were devoted, with much pleasure and profit, to reading the works and discussing the lives, character and times of English and American authors of reputation. He was more or less connected with various moneyed institutions. He was a director of the State Capital Bank from its organization under a State charter until his appointment to the bench, when he resigned. He was a director and president of the First National Bank from its organization until he lost confidence in its cashier, when he disposed of his stock and resigned. He was for many years a director of the Manchester and Lawrence Railroad, and for several years its president. In his religious sentiments he was a liberal Unitarian, and took a prominent part in the work of the society in Concord, serving for several years as the superintendent of its Sunday-school, and showing his interest in it by leaving it a legacy of one thousand dollars in his will, the interest on which sum to be devoted to the support of liberal preaching. Educated a Democrat, but with strong anti-slavery convictions, he acted with the Democratic party until its devotion to the extension of slavery compelled its abandonment in 1846, and for the next ten years he acted as an Independent Democrat. Upon the formation of the Republican party he joined it, and continued in its ranks until, in 1875, he resumed his connection with the Democracy.

In the spring of 1877, forty years from his admission to the bar, Judge Fowler determined to retire from active practice. A severe illness in the fall of that year confirmed his resolution. Before his full recovery, by the advice of his physician, he decided to visit Europe. Accompanied by his wife, daughter and third son, he left Boston on the 13th of April, 1878, and returned to New York on the 17th of October following, having, during his absence, visited the principal points of interest in England, Scotland, Ireland, Italy, Switzerland, Bavaria, Austria, Bohemia, Saxony, Prussia, Hanover, Holland, Belgium, Germany and France. He returned home with renewed strength and energy, and passed the next four years in the full enjoyment of health and happiness, in the quiet of his pleasant home in Concord and his beautiful cottage by the sea, near Rye Beach.

In October, 1882, the great sorrow of his life came upon him in the loss of his dearly-beloved wife, after a long and painful illness. He had be peculiarly fortunate in his domestic relations. On the 13th of July, 1837, he married the daughter of Robert and Polly Dole (Cilley) Knox, of Epsom, N. H., and granddaughter of General Joseph Cilley, of the Revolution, Mary Dole Cilley Knox, by whom he had five children,--four sons and one daughter,--all now living.

In the winter of 1882-83, Judge Fowler had a severe attack of gastric fever at Richmond, Va., while on his way to Florida for his health. After a long convalescence at St. Augustine, Fla., he fully recovered his health and spent the entire winter and spring in the South.

In November, 1883, he again went abroad, spending six delightful months in Nice, Mentone and Italy, returning in May to New Hampshire after a month�s sojourn in Paris and London.

Again, in November, 1884, he went away from his Concord home, and sought the warmer climate of California, spending the greater part of the winter at Monterey. Here he again suffered from attacks of gastritis, and, after a trip down to Santa Barbara, was very ill at San Francisco, and died at San Rafael, Cal., on the 26th of April, A.D., 1885. His remains were embalmed and brought to Concord, and were buried, May 9th, from his residence.

Previous Page       Next Page