The Court, Bench, And Bar Of Delaware County.

Frederick J. Hinkson, Sr., was elected one of the associate judges of Delaware County courts in 1856. An account of Judge Hinkson will be found elsewhere in this volume.

Only two of all the persons who have been associate judges of the county of Delaware are living. The oldest, in point of commission, is Charles R. Williamson, he having been commissioned by Governor Packer, Jan. 10, 1860, to fill the position on the bench made vacant by Judge Hinkson's resignation. The other is Judge Thomas Reese. In the succeeding October, Dr. George Smith was elected to the office. Mr. Williamson had also been county treasurer. He resides in the borough of Media.

Bartine Smith was chosen one of the associate judges of the courts of Delaware County at the October election in 1866, his commission bearing date November 8th of that year. He was born in 1803, and was for many years a merchant in Haverford. On April 14, 1840, he was appointed a justice of the peace, was reappointed April 15, 1845, and elected to the same position in the spring of 1862. In 1861 he was clerk to the county commissioners, continuing as such until he was elected to the bench. In 1871 he was re-elected to the judicial office, and continued therein until the expiration of his term, when the provisions of the Constitution abolishing the office became operative. Judge Smith died Dec. 12, 1877, aged seventy-four years.

Judge Thomas Reece was born in Middletown township, Delaware County. He was elected associate judge in 1866, and served a continuous period of ten years. A further sketch of Judge Reece will be found in the history of Media.

On Nov. 23, 1876, just previous to the termination of the official career of Associate Judges Smith and Reece by the limitation of the Constitution of 1874, a banquet was given at Media to the retiring judges by the members of the bar and county offcers. Highly complimentary resolutions were adopted, handsomely engrossed, and presented to Judges Smith and Reece, and speeches appropriate to the occasion were made. On Dec. 1, 1876, the associate judges retired from the bench and the time-honored offce ceased to be, and henceforth became simply a part of the annals of the county.

As a rule it may be accepted that from the establishment of the colonial government until 1790, criminal cases, excepting those of trivial character, were prosecuted on the part of the government by the attorney-general in person. This statement, however, is not without exception, for at the court held at Chester on the 3d day of 1st week Tenth month, 1684, on the trial of Edward Hulbert Taylor, who was indicted for larceny, the records state that Charles Pickering "pleads as attorney to ye King," which is the first case in which it is directly asserted that counsel appeared on behalf of the government, although it is evident that Attorney-General John White was present in that capacity at the trial of Magaret Mattson, at Philadelphia, before Penn and the Council, 27th of the Twelfth month, 1683. In Taylor's case, as in that of Mattson, the appearance of an attorney for the prosecution was of slight effect, for the prisoner was acquitted by the jury. At the Court of Quarter Sessions at Chester, May 25, 1708, Thomas Clark, who was commissioned attorney-general on the 8th of that month, "appeared in open court and was qualified attorney-general for the county of Chester, according to law." The county records on the subject furnish us with but meagre information, and that not of much general interest. By the act of Feb. 28, 1710, the justices of the county courts, and the mayor and recorder of Philadelphia, respectively were empowered to admit attorneys to plead in these courts, and on misbehavior could suspend or prohibit attorneys from practicing before their tribunal. The act of May 31, 1748, provided that "in trials of all capital crimes, learned counsel shall be assigned the prisoner." On May 22, 1722, the Assembly passed a law providing for the admission of attorneys in any of the county courts, "which said attornies so admitted may practice in all the courts of this province without any further or other license or admittance." A note in 1st Dallas' "Laws of Pennsylvania," on this section of the act of 1722,¹ conveys the impression there were no other statutory enactments respecting attorneys until that of Sept. 25, 1786, but such impression is erroneous; the act of Aug. 26, 1727, provided "that there may be a competent number of persons, of an honest disposition and learned in the law, admitted by the justices of the said respective courts to practice as attornies there, who shall behave themselves justly and faithfully in their practice." That this act was generally observed is evident from the fact that the oath administered to attorneys at the present day is almost identical with that set forth in the enactment. It was: "And before they are so admitted shall take the following qualification, viz., 'Thou shalt behave thyself in the office of Attorney within the Court according to the best of thy learning and ability, and with all good Fidelity as well to the Court as to the Client; thou shalt use no Falsehood, nor Delay any Persons Caused for Lucre or Malice."² The admission in any of the county courts was as before an admission to all in this province, and attorneys in all civil cases were compelled to file

² Duke of York's Book of Laws, p. 403.