AT THE BAR.
After Robert Toombs left the University of Georgia, he entered Union
College at Schenectady, N. Y., under the presidency of Dr. Eliphalet
Knott. Here he finished his classical course and received his A. B.
degree. This was in 1828, and in 1829 he repaired to the University of
Virginia, where he studied law one year. In the Superior Court of Elbert
County, Ga., holden on the 18th day of March, 1830, he was admitted to
the bar. The license to practice recites that "Robert A. Toombs made his
application for leave to practice and plead in the several courts of law
and equity in this State, whereupon the said Robert A. Toombs, having
given satisfactory evidence of good moral character, and having been
examined in open court, and being found well acquainted and skilled in
the laws, he was admitted by the court to all the privileges of an
attorney, solicitor, and counsel in the several courts of law and equity
in this State."
The license is signed by William H. Crawford, Judge, Superior Court,
Northern Circuit. Judge Crawford had served two terms in the United
States Senate from Georgia. He had been Minister to Paris during the
days of the first Napoleon. He had been Secretary of War and of the
Treasury of the United States. In 1825 he received a flattering vote for
President, when the Clay and Adams compact drove Jackson and Crawford to
the rear. Bad health forced Mr. Crawford from the field of national
politics, and in 1827, upon the death of Judge Dooly, Mr. Crawford was
appointed Judge of the Northern Circuit. He held this position until his
death in Elbert County, which occurred in 1834. Crawford was a friend
and patron of young Toombs. The latter considered him the full peer of
Webster and of Calhoun.
Robert Toombs was married eight months after his admission to the bar.
His career in his profession was not immediately successful. A newspaper
writer recently said of him that "while his contemporaries were fighting
stubbornly, with varying luck, Toombs took his honors without a
struggle, as if by divine right." This was no more true of Toombs than
it is true of other men. He seems to have reached excellence in law by
slow degrees of toil. Hon. Frank Hardeman, Solicitor-General of the
Northern Circuit, was one of the lawyers who examined Toombs for
admission to the bar. He afterward declared that Robert Toombs, during
the first four or five years of his practice, did not give high promise.
His work in his office was spasmodic, and his style in court was too
vehement and disconnected to make marked impression. But the exuberance
or redundancy of youth soon passed, and he afterward reached a height in
his profession never attained by a lawyer in Georgia.
His work during the first seven years of his practice did not vary in
emolument or incident from the routine of a country lawyer. In those
days the bulk of legal business lay in the country, and the most
prominent men of the profession made the circuit with their saddle-bags,
and put up during court week at the village taverns. Slaves and land
furnished the basis of litigation. Cities had not reached their size and
importance, corporations had not grown to present magnitude, and the
wealth and brains of the land were found in the rural districts. "The
young lawyers of to-day," says Judge Reese of Georgia, "are far in
advance of those during the days of Toombs, owing to the fact that
questions and principles then in doubt, and which the lawyers had to dig
out, have been long ago decided, nor were there any Supreme Court
reports to render stable the body of our jurisprudence."
The counties in which Robert Toombs practiced were Wilkes, Columbia,
Oglethorpe, Elbert, Franklin, and Greene. The bar of the Northern
Circuit was full of eminent men. Crawford presided over the courts and a
delegation of rare strength pleaded before him. There were Charles J.
Jenkins, Andrew J. Miller, and George W. Crawford of Richmond County;
from Oglethorpe were George R. Gilmer and Joseph Henry Lumpkin; from
Elbert, Thomas W. Thomas and Robert McMillan; from Greene, William C.
Dawson, Francis H. Cone; from Clarke, Howell Cobb; from Taliaferro,
Alexander H. Stephens. Across the river in Carolina dwelt Calhoun and
McDuffie. As a prominent actor in those days remarked: "Giants seem to
grow in groups. There are seed plats which foster them like the big
trees of California, and they nourish and develop one another, and seem
to put men on their mettle." Such a seed plat we notice within a radius
of fifty miles of Washington, Ga., where lived a galaxy of men,
illustrious in State and national affairs.
In 1837 the great panic which swept over the country left a large amount
of litigation in its path. Between that time and 1843, Lawyer Toombs did
an immense practice. It is said that in one term of court in one county
he returned two hundred cases and took judgment for $200,000. The
largest part of his business was in Wilkes and Elbert, and his fees
during a single session of the latter court often reached $5000. During
these six years he devoted himself diligently and systematically to the
practice of his profession, broken only by his annual attendance upon
the General Assembly at Milledgeville. It was during this period that he
developed his rare powers for business and his surpassing eloquence as
an advocate. He made his fortune during these years, for after 1843, and
until the opening of the war between the States, he was uninterruptedly
a member of Congress.
There was no important litigation in eastern or middle Georgia that did
not enlist his services. He proved to be an ardent and tireless worker.
He had grown into a manhood of splendid physique, and he spent the days
and most of the nights in careful application. He never went into a case
until after the most thorough preparation, where preparation was
possible. But he had a wonderful memory and rare legal judgment. He was
thoroughly grounded in the principles of law. He possessed, as well,
some of that common sense which enabled him to see what the law ought to
be, and above all else, he had the strongest intuitive perception of
truth. He could strip a case of its toggery and go right to its vitals.
He was bold, clean, fearless, and impetuous, and when convinced he had
right on his side would fight through all the courts, with irresistible
impulse. He was susceptible to argument, but seemed absolutely blind to
fear.
The brightest chapters of the life of Toombs are perhaps his courthouse
appearances. There is no written record of his masterly performances,
but the lawyers of his day attest that his jury speeches were even
better than his political addresses.
A keen observer of those days will tell you that Mr. Stephens would
begin his talk to the jury with calmness and build upon his opening
until he warmed up into eloquence; but that Mr. Toombs would plunge
immediately into his fierce and impassioned oratory, and pour his
torrent of wit, eloquence, logic, and satire upon judge and jury. He
would seem to establish his case upon the right, and then defy them to
disregard it.
In spite of this vehement and overpowering method he possessed great
practical gifts. He had the knack of unraveling accounts, and while not
technically skilled in bookkeeping, had a general and accurate knowledge
which gave him prestige, whether in intricate civil or criminal cases.
He was a rash talker, but the safest of counselors, and practiced his
profession with the greatest scruple. On one occasion he said to a
client who had stated his case to him: "Yes, you can recover in this
suit, but you ought not to do so. This is a case in which law and
justice are on opposite sides."
The client told him he would push the case, anyhow.
"Then," replied Mr. Toombs, "you must hire someone else to assist you in
your damned rascality."
On one occasion a lawyer went to him and asked him what he should charge
a client, in a case to which Mr. Toombs had just listened in the
courthouse.
"Well," said Toombs, "I should have charged a thousand dollars; but you
ought to have five thousand, for you did a great many things I could not
have done."
Mr. Toombs was strict in all his engagements. His practice remained with
him, even while he was in Congress, and his occasional return during the
session of the Superior Court of the Northern Circuit gave rise at one
time to some comment on the part of his opponents, the Democrats. The
nominee of that party, on the stump, declared that the demands upon Mr.
Toombs's legal talent in Georgia were too great to admit of his strict
attendance to public business in Washington. When Mr. Toombs came to
answer this point, he said: "You have heard what the gentleman says
about my coming home to practice law. He promises, if elected to
Congress, he will not leave his seat. I leave you to judge,
fellow-citizens, whether your interest in Washington will be best
protected by his continued presence or his occasional absence." This hit
brought down the house. Mr. Toombs's addresses to the Supreme Court were
models of solid argument. During the early days of the Supreme Court of
Georgia, it was a migratory body; the law creating it tended to
popularize it by providing that it should hold its sessions in the
different towns in the State convenient to the lawyers. The court once
met in the little schoolroom of the Lumpkin Law School in Athens. One of
the earliest cases heard was a land claim from Hancock County, bristling
with points and involving about $100,000 worth of property. A. H.
Stephens, Benjamin H. Hill, Howell and Thomas Cobb were employed, but in
this splendid fight of Titans, Justice Lumpkin declared that the finest
legal arguments he ever heard were from the lips of Robert Toombs.
Hon. A. H. Stephens said the best speech Mr. Toombs ever made was in a
case in which he represented a poor girl who was suing her stepfather
for cruel treatment. The defendant was a preacher, and the jury brought
in a verdict for $4000, the maximum sum allowed, and petitioned the
Judge to allow them to find damages in a heavier amount.
One of the most celebrated causes Mr. Toombs was engaged in before the
war was a railroad case heard in Marietta, Ga., in September, 1858.
Howell Cobb and Robert Toombs were employed on one side, while Messrs.
Pettigru and Memminger, of Charleston, giants of the Carolina bar, were
ranged in opposition. The ordeal was a very trying one. The case
occupied seven days. Mr. Toombs, always an early riser, generally
commenced his preparation in this case at half-past five in the morning.
The hearing of the facts continued in the courthouse until seven in the
evening, and the nights were passed in consultation with counsel.
Attendants upon this celebrated trial declared that Toombs's manner in
the courtroom was indifferent. That, while other lawyers were busy
taking notes, he seemed to sit a listless spectator, rolling his head
from side to side, oblivious to evidence or proceeding. And yet, when
his time came to conclude the argument, he arose with his kingly way,
and so thorough was his mastery of the case, with its infinite detail,
its broad principles, and intricate technicalities, that his argument
was inspiring and profound. His memory seemed to have indelibly pictured
the entire record of the seven days, and to have grouped in his mind the
main argument of counsel. It was a wonderful display of retentiveness,
acumen, learning, and power. On one occasion, while a member of the
United States Senate, he came to Georgia to attend a session of the
Supreme Court in Milledgeville. He writes his wife: "I have had a hard,
close week's work. The lawyers very kindly gave way and allowed my cases
to come on this week, which brought them very close together, and as I
was but ill prepared for them, not having given them any attention last
winter, and but little this spring, I have been pretty much speaking all
day and studying all night." In March, 1856, Mr. Toombs wrote to his
wife, whom he had left in Washington City, that the spring term of
Wilkes court would be the most laborious and disagreeable he ever
attended. Says he: "For the first time in my life, I have business in
court of my own--that is, where I am a party. The Bank of the State of
Georgia has given me a year's work on my own account. If I live I will
make the last named party repent of it."
At another time he wrote: "I had fine weather for Elbert, and a
delightful trip. Everything went well in Elbert with my business." It
usually did. There was no county in which he was more of an autocrat
than in Elbert. He never failed to carry the county in politics, even
when Elbert had a candidate of her own for Congress. His legal advice
was eagerly sought, and he was more consulted than any other man in
Georgia about public and private affairs. The reason of his phenomenal
success as counsel was that, united with his learning and forensic
power, he had a genius for detail. He was a natural financier. He used
to tell President Davis, during the early days of the Confederacy, that
four-fifths of war was business, and that he must "organize" victory.
During the sessions of Elbert court his arguments swept the jury, his
word was law outside. His talk was inspiring to the people. His rare and
racy conversation drew crowds to his room every night, and to an
occasional client, who would drop in upon his symposium to confer with
him, he would say, with a move of his head, "Don't worry about that now.
I know more about your business than you do, as I will show you at the
proper time." His fees at Elbert were larger than at any other court
except his own home in Wilkes. It was during the adjournment of court
for dinner that he would be called out by his constituents to make one
of his matchless political speeches. He never failed to move the crowds
to cheers of delight.
On one occasion he was at Roanoke, his plantation in Stewart County, Ga.
He writes his wife: "I was sent for night before last to appear in
Lumpkin to prosecute a case of murder: but as it appeared that the act
was committed on account of a wrong to the slayer's marital rights, I
declined to appear against him." Mr. Toombs was the embodiment of
virtue, and the strictest defender of the sanctity of marriage on the
part of man as well as woman. His whole life was a sermon of purity and
devotion.
Judge William M. Reese, who practiced law with Mr. Toombs, and was his
partner from 1840 to 1843, gives this picture of Toombs at the bar: "A
noble presence, a delivery which captivated his hearers by its intense
earnestness: a thorough knowledge of his cases, a lightning-like
perception of the weak and strong points of controversy; a power of
expressing in original and striking language his strong convictions; a
capacity and willingness to perform intellectual labor; a passion for
the contest of the courthouse; a perfect fidelity and integrity in all
business intrusted to him, with charming conversational powers--all
contributed to an immense success in his profession. Such gifts, with a
knowledge of business and the best uses of money, were soon rendered
valuable in accumulating wealth."
Although Mr. Toombs often appeared in courts to attend to business
already in his charge, he gave out that he would not engage in any new
causes which might interfere with his Congressional duties. The
absorbing nature of public business from 1850 to 1867 withdrew him from
the bar, and the records of the Supreme Court of Georgia have only about
twenty-five cases argued by him in that time. Some of these were of
commanding importance, and the opinions of the Justices handed down in
that time bear impress of the conclusiveness of his reasoning and the
power of his effort before that tribunal. Judge E. H. Pottle, who
presided over the courts of the Northern Circuit during the later years
of Toombs's practice, recalls a celebrated land case when Robert Toombs
was associated against Francis H. Cone--himself a legal giant. Toombs's
associate expected to make the argument, but Cone put up such a powerful
speech that it was decided that Toombs must answer him. Toombs
protested, declaring that he had been reading a newspaper, and not
expecting to speak, had not followed Judge Cone. However, he laid down
his paper and listened to Cone's conclusion, then got up and made an
overmastering forensic effort which captured Court and crowd.
The last appearance Toombs ever made in a criminal case was in the
Eberhart case in Oglethorpe County, Ga., in 1877. He was then
sixty-seven years of age, and not only was his speech fine, but his
management of his case was superb. He had not worked on that side of the
court for many years, but the presiding Judge, who watched him closely,
declared that he never made a mistake or missed a point.
It was during a preliminary hearing of this case that Toombs resorted to
one of his brilliant and audacious motions, characteristic of him. The
State wanted to divide the case and try the principals separately.
Father and son were charged with murder. The defense objected, but was
overruled by the Court. General Toombs then sprung the point that Judge
Pottle was not qualified to preside, on the ground of a rumor that he
had selected the men of the jury panel instead of drawing them. Toombs
further argued that the Court was not competent to decide the question
of fact. Judge Pottle vacated the bench and the clerk of court called
Hon. Samuel H. Hardeman to preside. Toombs and Benjamin H. Hill, his
assistant, contended that the clerk had no right to appoint a judge.
Judge Hardeman sustained the point and promptly came down, when Judge
Pottle resumed the bench and continued the case--just the result that
Toombs wanted. This case attracted immense comment, and in the
Constitution of 1877 a provision was made, growing out of this incident,
providing for the appointment of judges _pro hac vice_.
He was a bitter enemy to anything that smacked of monopoly, and during
the anti-railroad agitation of 1879-80, he said: "If I was forty-five
years old I would whip this fight." Still, he was an exceedingly just
man. Linton Stephens, noted for his probity and honor, said he would
rather trust Robert Toombs to decide a case in which he was interested
than any man he ever saw.
During the last five years of General Toombs's life he was seldom seen
in the courtroom. He was sometimes employed in important causes, but his
eyesight failed him, and his strength was visibly impaired. His
addresses were rather disconnected. His old habit of covering his points
in great leaps, leaving the intervening spaces unexplained, rendered it
difficult to follow him. His mind still acted with power, and he seemed
to presume that his hearers were as well up on his subject as he was.
His manner was sometimes overbearing to the members of the bar, but no
man was more open to reason or more sobered by reflection, and he was
absolutely without malice. He was always recognized as an upright man,
and he maintained, in spite of his infirmities, the respect and
confidence of the bench and bar and of the people.
Chief Justice Jackson said: "In the practice of law this lightning-like
rapidity of thought distinguished Toombs. He saw through the case at a
glance, and grasped the controlling point. Yielding minor hillocks, he
seized and held the height that covered the field, and from that
eminence shot after shot swept all before it. Concentrated fire was
always his policy. A single sentence would win his case. A big thought,
compressed into small compass, was fatal to his foe. It is the clear
insight of a great mind only that shaped out truth in words few and
simple. Brevity is power, wherever thought is strong. From Gaul Caesar
wrote '_Veni, vidi, vici._' Rome was electrified, and the message
immortalized. Toombs said to this Court, 'May it please your
Honor--Seizin, Marriage, Death, Dower,' and sat down. His case was won,
the widow's heart leaped with joy, and the lawyer's argument lives
forever."