the party and so far as possible to minimize the unlimited and arbitrary power of individual leaders. Out of this plan grew up the County Democracy, which for a number of years exerted a predominant influence in Democratic politics in this City. So long as it adhered to its fundamental principle of organization Mr. Anderson gave it his enthusiastic and most useful support. His interest in it only waned when it began to relapse into the same sort of condition which it had been organized to oppose. The next movement which excited his earnest support was the so-called Anti-Snap movement. In the late Winter or early Spring of 1886 the Democratic State Convention for the selection of delegates to the approaching National Convention was suddenly called at an unexampled early date. It was the generally accepted belief that this move was made with a view to the selection of a delegation which would be unfavorable to the nomination of President Cleveland. A great number of Democrats of the same general character as those who formed the Committee of One Hundred in 1881 proceeded to create an organization of Democrats extending all over the State. The labor involved was prodigious. The time was short and the obstacles were many. Of all those who labored unremittingly none was more effective and tireless than Mr. Anderson. The result of his labors and those of his co-laborers has become a matter of history. It it is quite safe to say that Mr. Anderson's political actions and activities were always influenced solely by his profound and conscientious belief in the justice of each cause which he espoused."

In his private and domestic life he was fortunate, happy and without reproach. He bore the inevitable trials of life with fortitude and exemplary patience. As a citizen he was ever ready to do his full part for the sake of the public good, without hope of personal reward. As a member of our profession he set a high example in the performance of that important part of the great work of the administration of justice which by our system of law is assigned to the attorney and the advocate. The purity, the charm and the strength of his personal character permeated all the actions of his life and gave to them their efficiency and value. From his life and example the profession of the law has received honor, and his name should ever be held in grateful memory by this Association.

(Prepared by John H. Judge)

George Peirce Andrews was born at North Bridgeton, Maine, the 29th day of September, 1835, and passed away at the City of New York on the 24th day of May, 1902. His father was Colonel Solomon Andrews and his mother Sybil Ann Farnsworth, both of Maine. After some instruction in a private school in his birthplace and in the public school in St. Johnsbury, Vermont, where his parents had removed, he entered Williston Seminary, East Hampton, Massachusetts, at fifteen years of age. There he prepared for Yale University, which he entered in the Fall of 1854,. and was graduated with the class of 1858, securing the highly prized honor of class orator.

After his graduation he went to Portland, Maine, and began the study of the law in the office of United States Senator William Pitt Fessenden. In 1858 he went to Carroll Parish, Louisiana, as tutor in an old Southern family, continuing there reading the textbooks of his chosen profession. In i860 he came to New York City and renewed his studies with H. P. Fessenden, a relative of the Senator. He secured a clerkship in the office of the United States District Attorney for the Southern District of New York under Judge Roosevelt, and there began his useful public life, which practically continued for the remainder of his days. He kept up his law studies while a clerk, and was admitted to practice at the Bar of this State in May, i860. He advanced himself in this office rapidly, and when E. Delafield Smith was appointed United States District Attorney by President Lincoln in 1861 he found Mr. Andrews master of all matters assigned to him and of the growing details of that busy office during the Civil War. He was soon made a full assistant, a position which he held under the various changes until 1869, when he resigned to take up the private practice of the law. This, however, was only for a short time, as he was appointed first assistant Corporation Counsel to the City of New York in December, 1872. This important position he held until 1882, when Mayor Grace made him Corporation Counsel. In 1883 he was nominated by the United Democratic factions in this City as Justice of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, and was elected by a large majority. He served as Judge the full term of fourteen years, when he was renominated by the Republican party and Citizens' Union, but that ticket was unsuccessful. The following year he was renominated by the Democratic party, and elected to the Supreme Court for a second term.

Both in the Corporation Counsel's office and as Judge he was recognized as a high authority on municipal and corporation law and in equity cases. He presided in all branches of the Supreme Court, including the criminal. His opinions on complicated questions arising under the tax laws were of exceptional value and seldom reversed. As Corporation Counsel he personally investigated and carried through all the courts the heavy and difficult litigation on behalf of the City against the national banks and monied corporations, resulting in final decisions which brought to the City's treasury more than three millions of dollars for unpaid back taxes, and established the law under which they have since paid much more. As a Judge he was a firm believer in trial by jury, often saying "they came as near being right and fair as was possible under our present social system." In 1897 in an able opinion he declared the part of the Liquor Tax Law to be unconstitutional that denied the right of trial by jury.

Early in May, 1902, Judge Andrews was stricken with apoplexy, followed by another stroke, from the effects of which he departed this life on May 24th, 1902. He added to our long list of deceased Judges a life too early extinguished by the exacting conditions which surround the Judiciary in their arduous work.

In 1889 he married Catherine M. Van Auken, the daughter of the late Commodore Cornelius K. Garrison. Mrs. Andrews survives him. He had no children. He was an early member of the Union League Club, also of the Manhattan, Metropolitan and the New York Yacht Clubs.

To him, as a young Assistant United States District Attorney, is due the credit of the conviction and execution of Captain Nathaniel Gordon for the crime of carrying on the slave trade on the high seas. At the opening of the Civil War 130 vessels were engaged in the slave trade, with their headquarters in New York City. Captain Gordon was caught by one of our cruisers on the Congo River in a ship called the "Erie," which had on board 890 young negroes, male and female. He was indicted in New York City, the Federal law of 1820 making this business an act of piracy, with the death penalty. On the first trial the jury disagreed, and then Mr. Andrews, to whom was assigned the duty of preparing and prosecuting the case, personally sought the only evidence which he knew could convict this man, through the seaport towns of Maine, and there found members of the crew, but only after a long, wearisome and careful search. It was difficult to induce the crew to testify, as they were liable to prosecution. The second trial was before Judge Nelson. Gordon's defense was the theretofore successful plea that he was not the master of the vessel, and was only a passenger, but the masterly preparation of the evidence and prosecution of the case by Mr. Andrews resulted in the conviction of Captain Gordon and his subsequent execution in the Tombs on February 21st, 1862. It is generally conceded that the execution of this man, who was foremost in that nefarious trade, put an end to the slave trade in this country, which had continued for over three hundred years, and for at least forty-two years after Congress had forbidden it. Thousands of slaves had suffered tortures on these voyages, thousands had been thrown overboard or suffocated in the holds of the slave ships, but not a person engaged in that awful business had been punished in the United States until Mr. Andrews convicted Captain Gordon. While he was tutoring in Louisiana he had studied the slave question on the ground, and then was laid in his heart and in his mind the incentive that moved him to the heroic work which convicted Captain Gordon.

Judge Andrews was extremely cautious and reticent, even among his intimate friends, and never talked for the sake of talking. He was thoughtful and reserved, but very genial in a quiet way, and full of devotion to those he loved. He was a great reader of literature, especially French. His class oration was a strong paper, giving his early views on the depressing influence of intellectual authority over men's minds, and the need of independent thought for every one, thus expounding at that early time the thought of the majority of the educated men of this day. Looking back over his life, one is impressed to observe how truly it presented an example of his original cast of mind, as set forth in his class oration. Although his life was spent in propounding and enforcing the administration of the law, he never abandoned his belief in the need of independent thought. He was never promoted to the various offices he held through political influence, but solely through merit. He seemed to step into the offices as though they were created and waiting for him. He always thought it dangerous for a lawyer to get away from his law books, and. looked forward to the time when he could end his later days in liberal study, as he had a great appreciation of the merits of literature. His reflecting powers of mind were so great that he grasped the substance of a thing by direct force. His style was direct and cogent, never wasting time on unimportant matters, and he was a master of the art of clearly presenting facts and the law applicable. He contented himself with practical results. His diction was simple and clear. He was a loyal friend, clinging to the associates of his early life until the end. He had a strong temper, but even under the most trying circumstances rarely showed it, and always maintained that "he who judges between the imperfections of men should show as little as possible the imperfections in himself." No Judge on our Bench was more courteous and kind to the Bar, especially to its younger members. He was not a politician, but was always a Democrat of the most unflinching type.

He was the most "humane of judges and the most judicial of men," and leaves a name and record unsullied, and one that will ever have a place of honor in the history of this great City.

« PreviousContinue »