About the time I came from England to New York, a considerably more distinguished individual came either from Canada, Vermont, or elsewhere, to New York also. I mean Chester A. Arthur. Arthur had the advantage of me in one respect. I came here without without any money worth speakin’ of; he came with five hundred dollars in his pocket, which, thirty years ago, counted double or treble. He had a rather better education, too, than I had. So that altogether he had the best of me. But I don’t complain. We can’t all be Presidents, and for that matter, I guess Chester A. Arthur had thirty years ago as little idea of bein’ President as I had.
Arthur always thought a good deal of Arthur, and from the first he determined to associate only with the big bugs. One of the big bugs of his early New York days was Judge Culver, of Brooklyn, who had his law office in this city. And it was in the office of this Judge Culver that the present President made his entree or debut as a lawyer.
Among Arthur’s earliest friends was a lawyer named Gardner, Henry D. Gardner, I think, was his full name. This Gardner was clever and sociable and a man of style, and Arthur bein’ ditto, the two got along very well together, in fact got to be chums. Gardner could tell a good story, as can Arthur when he is in the humor. Both of ‘em were fond of good livin’, when they could get it; both wore good clothes, and always paid for ‘em before they wore ‘em, and they were both fond in a gentlemanly way of ladies’ society. They were also fond of the theatre and amusements in general. So they enjoyed life and each other’s company. Finally they formed a partnership together, and, thinkin’ the New York Bar rather crowded, they determined to “go out West” (as Horace Greeley told other men to do, though he never went himself). They accordin’ly reluctantly bade good-bye to New York, and started for the settin’ sun.
The West wasn’t then what it is now. Cincinnati was a very little town, just startin’, and as for Chicago, it was nowhere, hadn’t yet started. An Eastern jeweler named Dubosque had at that time some Western customers, who, in payment of their debts to him, gave him some lands in Illinois. The jeweler was very mad, refused to receive the land at first, and afterwards, when he had made up his mind to take the land rather than get nothin’, he went round botherin’ everybody to buy this land of him at any price. Finally he found a man who took the land off his hands at a merely nominal price. At first Dubosque was glad, but he lived long enough to bitterly repent his gladness, for the land he parted with for a song turned out to be right in the heart of Chicago, and is now worth millions. In his later years, if any of his friends wanted to have a joke with Dubosque and make him blue for the day, they would go up to him and inquire innocently if he had any lots in Chicago to sell, or what was the market price of Chicago lots.
Well, things bein’ in this state, two such citified sprigs as Arthur and Gardner naturally didn’t see much to suit ‘em out West. They struck one town they liked very much; the location was heathful; the people were enterprisin’ and the eatin’ and drinkin’ were good. But then all the men ate with their knives, and Chester A. Arthur could never stand that. Then they came to another place, even more healthful and bustlin’ than the first, but one day Arthur saw the mayor’s wife wipin’ her nose with her sleeve, and Chester A. Arthur couldn’t stand that. At a third place there were many things that pleased ‘em very much, but no liquor or wine of any kind was allowed to be sold, and Arthur and Gardner couldn’t stand that. And so it went on. There was always somethin’ the matter, and, to make a long story short, the pair of gilt-edged would-be Western settlers came back to New York, determined to remain here, and they did.
Arthur soon became associated in the management of a case which brought him prominently before the public. The Emmons case, which, under the old Fugitive Slave law, caused a great excitement alike in New York and in the South. In this case Arthur and Evarts took issue with the Fugitive Slave law, which was defended by O’Connor, the counsel for the Emmons family, the case bein’, after long delays and appeals, settled in favor of Evarts and Arthur’s side.
But the chief case in which Arthur appeared as counsel in New York was one in which the whole city of New York took a lively interest from a social point of view. It was a question of color, too, but color considered socially rather than politically.
At that time, just twenty-seven years ago, no colored people were allowed to ride with the white people in the street cars. On the Sixth avenue Line there were special cars, every sixth car, I think, in which colored people were accommodated; but on the Fourth avenue line they couldn’t ride at all. A sign was put up: “No colored persons allowed to ride in this car. Conductors must enforce this rule.” Just the same sort of rulin’ as applied to disorderly or drunken people.
From time to time the colored people had attempted to override, or ride over, this rule, but had always been unsuccessful and had submitted in silence; but one day a car conductor went a step–or rather bounced a colored individual several steps too far.
One mornin’ a Miss Lizzie Jennings, a neat-lookin’ mulatto woman, of undoubted respectability, well educated and a teacher in a Sunday-school herself, feelin’ very tired and havin’ to reach her Sunday-school buildin’ in a hurry, ventured to enter a Fourth avenue car. The conductor did not notice her at first and she took her seat and even rode a block or two, but then the conductor, goin’ up to her for her fare, said that she was a little “off color” and so insisted on her gettin’ off. The poor woman, whose only crime was her color, protested and pleaded, but in vain. Even the passengers, or at least some of ‘em, protested and pleaded in the poor woman’s behalf, and asked the conductor to make an exception in this particular case. But the conductor replied that his orders were imperative–as they were–and that he must obey them or be discharged himself, rather than which he preferred to discharge her. And he did discharge her, usin’, it was claimed, an unmanly and unnecessary amount of force in doin’ so.
The poor woman walked on wearily to her school, and probably would have submitted, like others of her patient race, to this indignity; but as it proved, this was the last straw that broke the camel’s back, and her friends and several prominent white men and women interested ‘emselves in testin’ the matter once and for all in the courts, and seein’ whether custom was to be omnipotent or not.
Opinions of leadin’ lawyers were taken, and at last Chester A. Arthur was formally engaged to conduct the case brought in the name of Lizzie Jennings against the Fourth Avenue Railroad Company.
Among the reasons that influenced those concerned in the choice of Arthur was the fact that he had been already employed in defendin’ the slave blacks in the Emmons case, and was therefore likely to have some sympathy for the free blacks, and the fact that he was already favorably known as a genial gentleman, probably more free from prejudices of any kind then the average Northern white man.
Mr. Arthur at once undertook the case, and without fee. The case made a big stir, and the community was quite excited. The car companies made common cause with the Fourth avenue line, and determined to be guided by the result of the case. Some of Arthur’s social friends were interested in the city railroads, and thinkin’ that their pecuniary interests would be interfered with by a decision in favor of the colored people, if such a decision should by any horrible chance be given, tried to dissuade him from any action in the matter. But “Chet” Arthur is not easily dissuaded from a thing he once undertakes. His stayin’ qualities are excellent, and he prosecuted the matter with vigor and ability.
He succeeded in having the case tried before a Brooklyn judge (Judge Rockwell) and a jury, and won his case, the fine of $500 being assessed on the Fourth avenue line and it bein’ held that the prohibition against the ridin’ of colored persons in the cars was illegal and unconstitutional.
The next day all the streetcars exhibited a big card, printed hurriedly the night before and bearin’ the legend conspicuously displayed: “Colored people allowed to ride in this car.”
[Editor’s notes: The Fugitive Slave Law case that Chester A. Arthur helped argue was Lemmon v. New York, summarized by Wikipedia.
Though Lizzie Jennings isn’t as familiar to many people as is the 20th century’s Rosa Parks, her case was no less significant. Jennings has been the subject of several books highlighting the struggle for civil rights.]
