The Supreme Court of Maine. McGaw : " You may go down East, if you think best, and grow up with the country, where there's no money now and nothing but black flies and mosquitoes; as for myself, I am going where the money is already made." His law library consisted of Blackstone, Nisi Prius Digest of Espinasse, and four books of forms by Samuel Freeman, styled "The Clerk's Assistant," " Probate Auxil iary," "Town Officer," and " Justice's As sistant." These, of course, were only the tools of trade, but the want of others com pelled brevity both of argument and plead ing. The application of testimony and law to the case in hand was close and direct. The opinions of the judges were often made up without reference to the arguments of counsel. " It is of no use to argue the case," said Whitman to his associate in a trial before Judge Parsons, " for the old fellow has got his opinion already drawn up in his pocket." Like Judge Parsons, Whit man did his work in the directest, plainest and simplest way. He came to Maine, in April, 1799, where he found his college friend and chum, Chan dler, at New Gloucester, then a half shiretown with Portland. Chandler and Samuel Thatcher were the only lawyers there, and there being no others to the north, he settled in Turner; but, after a short sojourn of three months, he returned to New Gloucester, tak ing the office vacated by Thatcher's removal to Warren; and, having decided to make his home here, he married a daughter of Cush ing Mitchell of his native town. Here repu tation, popularity and business flowed in up on him. But lawyers in those days must have been satisfied with small fees and mod erate living, for we learn that two dollars and a half was the usual charge for arguing a case in the Common Pleas, and twenty-five to fifty cents for drafting deeds and similar papers. Like other leaders of the bar, his office was constantly sought by students, and he never had less than two or three at the
473
same time. His half-brother, Josiah W. Mit chell and Simon Greenleaf (author of Greenleaf on Evidence) were fellow-students there; the one a genial, rollicking fellow, the other a studious, plodding, pious young man. Of them he said the former possessed greater natural talent, but the latter a persistent in dustry which yielded greater results. His success at the bar was rapid, and he soon be came a leader in politics. Like Parsons, he was solid and practical, cool and impartial, penetrating and just; he stripped off all dis guises, and held up facts to the light of sim ple truth. In argument he was lucid, log ical, conclusive. Mere rhetoric and diffuseness he despised. In talking to the jury his manner was that of a friend anxious to show the real merits of the controversy. He was tall and manly in person, honest and intelli gent in countenance. His addresses invari ably carried great weight and force. He was the candidate of the Federal Party for Congress in 1806, but was defeated by Daniel Illsley, a Democrat, by a few votes. At the next election in 1808, he was returned by a majority of three hundred, having moved the previous year to Portland, where his ability and character brought him an in creased clientage. The life of representative in Congress did not prove agreeable to him; on the contrary, it was irksome and unpleas ant. There were three sessions of the Con gress of which he was a member, and the journeys in those days were tedious and ex pensive. He was defeated at the next elec tion by William Widgery, after two trials, the first being a tie. From that time to 181 5, he attended exclusively to his profes sion, and that year and the next he was a member of the executive council of Massa chusetts. He was a member of the consti tutional convention at Brunswick in 1816, to consider the question of separation. He was the Federalist candidate for its president, but William King was chosen by a vote of 97 to 85. He led the minority against the au thority of the convention to act, basing its
