Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

student in the office, became a member of the firm under the name of Morrison, Stanley & Hiland.

In 1874 Judge Stanley was appointed one of the justices of the Circuit Court of New Hampshire, and retired from the firm, which became Morrison & Hiland.

In 1876 Roland Rowell, Esq., who had been a student in the office, became a member of the firm under name of Morrison, Hiland & Rowell. Mr. Hiland died in the latter part of 1878, and the firm was then dissolved.

In 1879 Hon. John P. Bartlett became a member of the firm and the name was Morrison & Bartlett; that firm continued until 1881, when Judge Bartlett retired, and from that time Mr. Morrison had no partner and did but very little work. He was accustomed to come to his old office daily and kept along in a way, but his health was declining and he was unable to transact business. It is a somewhat interesting fact that during the time he was engaged in business, the different firms in which Mr. Morrison was the senior partner entered in the court in Hillsborough county somewhere about three thousand two hundred cases, and appeared for the defendant in about twenty-six hundred cases, besides all the criminal business that they had and besides all the cases that they had in other counties, which were quite considerable in number. I might state also in this connection that Mr. Morrison was appointed solicitor of Hillsborough county in 1845, which position he held about four years, resigning in 1849 for the reason that the remuneration that he received for transacting the business of the state was so small he could not afford to continue in the office. Every lawyer will understand, it prevented the firms with which he was connected from engaging in the defense of any state action, his salary was very small, and it necessarily deprived him and his partners of a considerable volume of business which they would otherwise have been likely to re

In town affairs Mr. Morrison took quite an active part, and generally joined with those who were outside the "village" in the controversies in matters of taxes and making appropriations for the town improvements and the like. It is well known that for a time the people who were in the "village" of Manchester, as it was then called, were asking for these improvements and appropriations, whereas, those in the outskirts of the town were opposed to that practice. Mr. Morrison, being a Democrat and having sympathies in that direction, generally took up the causes of the outsiders, and in their controversies and by his speeches and adroit management in the parliamentary point of view, defeated the measures which were before the town meetings, and succeeded in gaining the favor of the outside people. He became quite popular with the Democrats and to a certain extent with the Whig party. He gained more friends among the Whigs than he lost among the Democrats by his management in these matters.

He was moderator of the town meeting in 1840 or 1841 and 1844, and was also a member of the committee of arrangements with reference to procuring some legislation which the city desired. He took a lively interest in the matter of a site for the town hall and was one of the committee to decide finally upon its selection.

In 1856, he was retained in the famous controversy before the New Hampshire legislature relating to the proposed railroad legislation. It will be remembered that there was an effort made at that time to procure the passage of a bill for the consolidation of the Manchester & Lawrence railroad and the Concord railroad.

Mr. Spaulding, Judge Upham, Col. Joseph A. Gilmore, and others interested, made a great effort to procure this legislation. Mr. Morrison, Hon. Benjamin F. Ayer, Hon. Daniel Clarke, and Hon. James U. Parker, were among the counsel who opposed it. On the other side, the counsel were Col. John

H. George, Hon. Josiah Quincy, and several distinguished members of the Boston bar.

At that time the opinion of the great majority of the people in New Hampshire was opposed to the consolidation of railroads. Notwithstanding the unfavorable outlook which those who favored the measure had, they engaged in this undertaking with great earnestness, and brought to bear every means that the corporation influence could obtain.

Mr. Morrison, Mr. Ayer, Mr. Clarke, and Mr. Parker all made arguments in opposition to the proposed legislation. The subject was divided, and each one occupied his own field without encroaching upon the others. It is not well to make comparisons under such circumstances. Suffice it to say, that Mr. Morrison's argument certainly ranked as high as either of the other eminent gentlemen, and that the bill was defeated by a decisive majority.

Mr. Morrison was always an ardent and out-spoken Democrat, and participated in the politics of the state quite actively from some time in 1839 or 1840 down to 1862 or 1863. He was a member of the House of Representatives in 1840, 1841, 1849, and 1850. He was also a member of the 31st and 33d Congress.

While in the New Hampshire legislature he was prominent and influential, and although not given to frequent speeches he occasionally addressed the house upon important measures, and was generally successful, and did much in the work of shaping legislation. He was regarded as a very able and adroit debater and shrewd in parliamentary tactics. One quite celebrated discussion in which he took part has been spoken of, and it is said that the speech which he made on that occasion was one of the ablest legal arguments ever made before the legislature. It was in relation to an amendment of the charter of the city of Portsmouth which provided that the different wards in the city should have the same authority in various matters as the towns throughout the state. It is said that Mr.

Morrison drew the bill and that the constitutionality of the measure was the subject of contention.

The opponents selected Mr. Christy, of Dover, who was one of the most noted lawyers of the state, to manage the debate on their side, and he was naturally looked to for an answer to Mr. Morrison's argument. The story runs that during the first part of Mr. Morrison's speech, Mr. Christy took notes as he passed along and paid particular attention to what was being said. After a time he laid down his pencil and listened attentively to what Mr. Morrison was saying. When Mr. Morrison closed his argument, Mr. Christy was expected to respond, but he failed to do so, and when asked why he did not reply, said that there was no reply to be made; that Mr. Morrison's argument had convinced him that the bill was constitutional and he declined to make any further contention.

In the political elections of New Hampshire he always took a deep interest, and occasionally went upon the stump. I remember hearing him in the canvass for the election of General Pierce in the town of Warner. There was a flag-raising and a mass meeting and the people from the various surrounding towns were very well represented. Dr. Jason H. Ames, a very distinguished physician from the neighboring town of Bradford, presided. Mr. Morrison was the principal speaker and occupied the most of the afternoon. I remember that the meeting was very large and enthusiastic and that his speech was regarded as a wonderful effort. I find in the files of the Patriot an allusion to it as one of the most remarkable addresses of the time, but no abstract is given of its contents.

On another occasion, a mass meeting was being held in the old city hall of Manchester; Hon. B. F. Ayer was president of the meeting and made an address. Mr. Morrison delivered the principal speech of the occasion. There was an excursion along the Northern railroad to Manchester to attend this meeting, and quite a large number of people came. I was among them, and I recollect that there was some disturbance by the

opponents during Mr. Ayer's speech and he called for the police to restore order. Mr. Morrison immediately objected to sending for the police and said that he would be responsible for the good order of the meeting. He was immediately introduced, and commenced his address, and I recollect very well the fact that in his preliminary remarks, calling upon them to preserve the good name of the city for order and proper conduct, he brought the meeting to a respectful silence, and there was no further trouble or annoyance.

As I remember his reputation and as I have heard it spoken of recently, he was eminently adroit and tactful and was capable of meeting emergencies and obtaining control of his audience as few men could do. The most prominent feature of his political life, however, was his action in Congress in opposing the passage of the Nebraska and Kansas bill. Indeed, viewing it from the present standpoint, it was among the grandest efforts in the history of our national legislation, and entitles him to the highest gratitude and admiration of succeeding generations. It is not consistent to go into the history of those times any further than to say it was a struggle for supremacy between slavery and anti-slavery, and that it was one of the most prominent and far-reaching events in a long and bitter controversy between those contending forces.

Mr. Morrison was a personal friend and admirer of President Pierce and was regarded as an able supporter of his administration, but he could not favor the Nebraska and Kansas bill, and arrayed himself with the opponents of that legislation.

His speech upon the passage of the measure was delivered May 19, 1854, before the house as a committee of the whole. It may be found in the appendix of Congressional Globe of the 33d Congress, page 49. He reviewed very carefully the whole subject of the history of the Missouri Compromise and the legislation connected with it, and also discussed with wonderful ability the two questions as they were styled in the report, one of domain, and one of empire or sovereignty.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »