MEMORIAL ON STEPHEN R. HARRIS

BY SMITH W. BENNETT.

When a student of the law comes to write of the life of his former preceptor, after years, have widened his experience and given to him, in some degree, the ability to appreciate the true greatness of his subject, he realizes his own limited capacity to express such appreciation in fitting terms and within proper compass.

My subject is a Johnston worthy of a Boswell, a lawyer worthy of a Campbell and his biographer should be one whose powers of character analysis would place before you, with perfect judgment those events which should properly be emphasized as constituting a life.

I can merely give to you the impression obtained in daily contact for a period of about twenty-five years, which, together with family data obtained from various sources, constitute a most imperfect sketch of a man I loved and venerated, Hon. Stephen R. Harris.

He was born on his father's farm seven miles west of Massillon, O., on the 22d day of May, 1824, and died on the 15th day of January, 1905, having attained the age of eighty years, seven months and twenty-three days. His family was of patriotic stock, his grandfather, John Harris, having been a solider in the revolutionary war, under General Washington, and distinguished himself at the battle of Monmouth, where his brother-in-law, John Hamilton, was killed beside him. He worked upon a farm and attended the district school until about fourteen years of age when he began life for himself, determined to acquire a higher education. He was employed as a clerk in a store in Canal Fulton, Stark county, about four years, and attended a select school at Dalton, taught by John W. Rankin, who was afterward a distinguished lawyer and a partner of the late Justice Miller of the United States supreme court.

In 1842 he was a student at Washington College, Pennsylvania, which institution was the alma mater of James G. Blaine. In later years he was honored by that institution with the degree of master of arts. In 1843 and 1844 he studied in Norwalk Seminary under the late Edward Thompson, afterwards a bishop of the Methodist church. For the next two years he was a student in the classical department of the Western Reserve College at Hudson. He returned to Canal Fulton and taught school in the winter of 1846 and 1847. He entered upon the study of law in the office of his uncle, John Harris, at Canton, Ohio, who was a pioneer lawyer of great native ability. After reading under instruction for two years he was admitted to the bar of Ohio in the spring of 1849, and on the 14th day of June of that year opened an office in Bucyrus and continued in active practice from then until the day of his death, a period of nearly fifty-six years.

For nearly thirty years Mr. Harris was associated with the late Judge Josiah Scott, with the exception of the period that Judge Scott served upon the supreme bench of the state. This partnership was terminated by the death of Judge Scott in the year 1879.

In 1894 Mr. Harris was nominated by the Republicans of his district for congress. The Thirteenth district then, as now, consisted of Erie, Sandusky, Seneca, Wyandot, Crawford and Marion counties, and usually gave a Democratic majority of between five and seven thousand. The campaign was unique. The personality of Mr. Harris made him one of the most popular of candidates and his successful election to congress was one of the surprises of that memorable year. He served through the fifty-fourth congress with ability and distinction, but a political life never had the attractions for him that the forum possessed. His short experience in politics was looked upon by his friends as merely diversion in which, if he had cared to pursue it in earlier life with the same ardor that he felt for the profession of law, he would have rapidly risen therein and ranked as one of the foremost statesmen of his period. During Mr. Harris' later years he was associated with his son-in-law, Rufus V. Sears, in the practice of the law at Bucyrus, and remained active until the very last.

He was married September 15, 1853, to Miss Mary J. Monnett. She died in 1889, leaving two sons and two daughters, who still survive.

He was one of the organizers of this association and was its president, serving from July 1893 to July 1894. He was not at the initial meeting held at Case Hall, Cleveland, July 8 and 9, 1880, for the purpose of organizing this association, but first entered the preliminary organization at an adjourned session thereof held at the state house in Columbus, December 28, 1880, and from that time has never missed a session. He was one of the most, if not the most, faithful member in the association work. It is sad to contemplate that at this session memorials are presented of three of the original members, Governor Nash, Judge R. A. Harrison and Mr. Harris.

As chairman of the committee on legal biography Mr. Harris assiduously sought to have a sketch of each member preserved in the annals of the association, and also to have noted upon its record some fitting tribute to those members who had departed.

His professional career has been one of uniform success. Having covered more than fifty-six years in active practice the record made by him is one attained by very few. I have made search for the earliest reported case in which he was engaged as counsel in the supreme court of this state and I find that in the case of Marks v. Sigler, reported in 3 O. S. 358, and decided at the December term 1854 of the supreme court, he was associated as counsel for the plaintiff in error, with Gen. Wm. H. Gibson, then himself a young member of the bar of Seneca county. His last reported case was that of Strauch v. Massillon Stoneware Company, decided January 3, 1905, and reported in the 71 O. S., 285. In the last reported case was involved the question of the operation of the Act of October 22, 1902, amending sections 5301, 5301a, of the Revised Statutes directing how a bill of exceptions must be prepared, allowed and filed in a cause. This was a proposed Act which was presented to this association in 1901 and again in 1902, and received its approval and became a law, as found in the 96 O. L., p. 17. The brief filed by Mr. Harris in that case was an exhaustive review of the law, treating all the Acts