Isaac Horton Maynard

From Main Street Museum Catalog Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Isaac horton maynard tammany times.png

Contents

Family Information

  • Isaac Horton Maynard,4 [Isaac,3 Elisha,2 Isaiah,1]

Isaac Horton Maynard was born at Bovina, N.Y. 9 April, 1838 to Isaac Maynard and Jane Falconer [___;b.r., Marv. Fam;__, Dela. Cent;__, Alba. Times;4 Feb., 1892, Clip;13].

He died at the Kenmore Hotel, Albany, New York, 12 June, 1898, æ. 58 and is buried in Woodland Cemetery, Delhi, N.Y. [Delh;gs, Dela. Coun;194].

He married at ___ 28 June, 1871 Margaret Maxwell Marvin, daughter of Charles Marvin and Frances Foote [___;m.r., Marv Bible;2, Marv Fam;__, Foote Fam;1;1942].

Daughter, born at Stamford, N. Y. [fff, Foote Fam;1;1942]:

  • i. Frances Maynard, b., 3 Dec., 1876 [Delhi;g.s., Foote Fam;1942]; d. at San Francisco, Portland Maine? [__;d.r., Delhi;g.s., ]; m. (Isaac) David Ford son of Oscar Ford and Martha Jackson [Rome Probate, Foote Fam;1;1942].

Youth

David Murray, ll.d., Delaware County, New York, Centennial History, Delhi, 1898, p. 194:

Judge Isaac Horton Maynard was born in Bovina in 1838, being a grandson of the first settler of that town. Graduated from Amherst in 1862. Studied law in the office of Judge Murray and established himself in the Stamford, N.Y. area. Here he was Supervisor in 1869 and ‘70. He was Elected County Judge as a Democrat, carrying the County by 1,355 majority...usually its majority was 800 Republican. In 1875 he was elected a member of the assembly: in 1884 he was appointed first deputy Attorney General of the State, which position he resigned to become second Comptroller under President Cleveland. In ‘87 he was appointed assistant Secretary of the United States Treasury. In 1892 Governor Flower appointed him one of the Judges of the Court of Appeals.

Judge Maynard was a man of scholarly attainment, a brilliant and successful lawyer and was highly esteemed by many friends. He died at Albany, 12 June, 1898 at the age of 58 years and remains rest in Woodland Cemetery in Delhi. Also contains bios of: Elisha Maynard, Elisha Horton Maynard

“Atticus,” Albany Times Union, “Noted Living Albanians and State Officials, A Series of Pen Portraits by One Who Knows Them.” 4 Feb., 1892, n.p.:

Isaac Horton Maynard. Among those who have filled with distinguished ability and faithfulness various important positions in civil life in our state and nation is the Hon. Isaac H. Maynard, he newly appointed associate judge of the court of appeals.

He was born on the 9th April, 1838, at Bovina, Delaware county, N.Y. He is a son of Isaac Maynard and Jane Falconer Maynard. His paternal ancestry was of English origin. His great grandfather, Isaiah Maynard, emigrated to this country from the north of England in 1750, and settled in the town of Rye, afterward Harrison, Westchester county N.Y. His grandfather, Elisha B. Maynard, removed from Westchester county in 1790, and settled in Bovina, then a part of Stamford, Delaware county N.Y. During the revolutionary war he had been a loyal soldier and bravely fought in defense of the defense of the stars and stripes. He was a man of great intelligence and integrity, very prominent in his day, and for many years held the office of a magistrate in his county. When this old pioneer came to Bovina he found the place an almost unbroken wilderness, but there, amidst the bold, romantic hills and valleys, he went to work with a will, erected a log cabin, leveled the tall old trees around his humble home and cultivated the land. He was the first settler within the present limits of the town of Bovina, where his memory is still cherished. He had a family of five sons and seven daughters and Isaac, born in 1795, the father of the present Judge Maynard, was the third son. In 1824 he moved back to Westchester county upon the old family homestead there where he died in 1841. Subsequently Judge Maynard’s father purchased the family home in Bovina and lived there until his death in 1876, at the age of eighty-two. He was a prominent man in the public affairs of his town and county, a magistrate for more than twenty years, a candidate for member of the assembly in 1855, the trusted counselor of the community, and greatly respected and beloved by all. Judge Maynard’s mother was born in the city of New York, and was the daughter of Archibald Falconer, a Scotchman, who came to this country in 1795 from Nairn, near Inverness, Scotland. He was mechanic, and in 1804 removed to Stamford, Delaware county, where the judge’s parents were married in 1822.

The earliest years of Judge Maynard were pleasantly passed on his father’s farm at Bovina, where he engaged in all kinds of farm work, attending the summer and winter terms of the district school until he reached the age of twelve, and after that only during the winter terms. In 1854 he went to Stamford seminary at Stamford, in the same county, where he was prepared for college. In the meantime he spent his vacations at work upon the farm, laying the foundation for a vigorous constitution. In September, 1858, he entered Amherst college, Massachusetts, from which he graduated with honor in July, 1862. He took one of the Mather prizes for excellence in Greek, and one the Hardy prizes for greatest improvement in extemporaneous debate during the college course. He delivered the German oration at the junior exhibition; was one of the monitors of his class; pronounced one of the English orations at commencement, and was valedictorian.

In September 1862, two months after his graduation from Amherst, he entered the law office of the late Hon. William Murray, afterward judge of the supreme court at Delhi, N.Y., and made rapid progress in the study of law. He was admitted to the bar at the Binghamton general term in Nov. 1863. He practiced law at Delhi until june 1865, when he removed to Stamford, Delaware Co., N.Y., his present residence. there he formed a law partnership with his cousin, the Hon. F.R. Gilbert, on of the most prominent and able lawyers in that part of the state and afterwards a judge of the supreme court. The firm of Gilbert & Maynard continued until January 1878. In 1869 Mr. Maynard was elected supervisor of the town of Stamford, and in 1870, was re-elected and made chairman of the board. Mr. Maynard was always a public spirited man, and, besides carrying on a large law practice, took an absorbing interest in promoting and developing the material resources of the town and community in which he lived and where he became deservedly popular. He was largely instrumental in securing the incorporation of the village of Stamford by special act of the legislature in 1870, and was the author of its charter. He was elected the first president of the village, and re-elected unanimously for ten years in succession. He was one of the founders and first trustees of the Stamford seminary in 1874, upon its incorporation by the regents of the university, and was a member of the board of trustees until it became a part of the Union free school of the village in 1881. He took an active part in organizing the Union free school and was first president of ist board of education, and has always been a member of the board. He was one of the founders of the National bank of Stamford in 1882, and has always been a director and is now its vice-president. He married, June 28, 1871, Miss Margaret M. Marvine, daughter of Charles Marvine, esq., of Delhi, N.Y. They have one child, a daughter, Miss Frances, sixteen years of age.

The legislative career of Mr. Maynard began in 1875, when he was elected a member of the assembly from Delaware county, and served in the session of 1876 on the committees on privileges and elections, two-thirds and three-fifths bills, and apportionment. He was a most able and influential member of the legislature, always ready and forcible in debate, and among the foremost leaders of the democratic party, in the service of which no man has ever been more loyal, while at the same time showing the most gentlemanly deportment to those who differ from him politically. In November, 1877, Mr. Maynard was elected county judge and surrogate of Delaware county, and served a full term of six years until January 1, 1884, adorning the bench by rare judicial ability and integrity.

In 1883, he was a candidate on the democratic ticket for secretary of state, having been nominated at the Buffalo convention on the first ballot, after an exciting contest, receiving 209 votes to 173 cast for his competitor, Hon. William Purcell of Rochester. He was defeated at the election by something over 18,000 majority, while the rest on the democratic ticket was elected by about the same majority.

On January 1, 1884, Judge Maynard was appointed by Attorney-General O’Brien first deputy attorney-general, and held the office until June 1, 1884, when he resigned to accept the office of second comptroller of the United States treasury, to which he had been appointed by President Cleveland, under Hon. Daniel Manning, secretary of the treasury. April 1, 1887, he was appointed assistant secretary of the treasury, to succeed Hon. Charles S. Fairchild, who had been made secretary upon the retirements of Mr. Manning, on account of ill health. When Judge Maynard went into the second comptroller’s office, the work of the bureau was over two years behind. When he left it, the work was up to current date. As assistant secretary he had charge of the customs service, the internal revenue service, the revenue marine, the supervising surgeon-general’s bureau, the navigation bureau, the life saving service, the lighthouse board, the steam inspection service, the miscellaneous division and the supervising ___ective bureau—all requiring his personal supervision. The appeals in the custom’s cases alone aggregated over 20,000 in a year.

All his numerous, official services at Washington, involving so many different and intricate cases, Judge...

Politics

Maynard Maxims.

  • “A Rigid economy in civil expenditures is the only open door to an honest administration of public affairs, and the only sure safeguard of public virtue.”
  • “Every use of an official trust for private gain is a public crime.”
  • “Every dollar taken from the citizens by unjust unequal, or unnecessary taxation is public robbery.”
  • “Every unnecessary infringement of a natural right is a wrong.”

(From Isaac H. Maynard’s Speech, Albany, Oct., 21)

Prohibitionist Maynard Clip;17:

Judge Isaac H. Maynard of Delaware County appears to divide the favor of the Democratic leader with William Purcell of Monroe, for the nomination for Secretary of State. The Judge is a gentleman of clean record, acknowledged ability, and unapproached integrity, but it is difficult to see how he can be satisfactorily placed upon the Democratic State ticket if there is any desire to make that ticket the winning one this fall. He is a Democrat, beyond doubt, but there is one point in which he is at issue with his party, and that on the question of prohibition. He is a pronounced prohibitionist and his views upon this subject have led him more than once to vote against his party on measures affecting the license and excise laws. The Democratic party has inscribed upon its records its hostility to sumptuary laws of every kind, but Mr. Maynard has inscribed upon his record an unwavering approval of the principle of the total prohibition of the manufacture and sale of liquor. In May, 1877, when the Assembly was equally divided on the Natchman excise bill, it was Mr. Maynard’s vote that prevented the House from disagreeing with the adverse report, and on various other questions relating to the traffic in liquor he has deserted his party to vote with the Republicans. It is no crime, of course, for a man to be a prohibitionist; some of the sincerest and best people in the Union are almost fanatical in their advocacy of a principle that has proved a failure wherever tried, but where the Democracy is likely to try a fall with Republicanism upon the question in this state the wisdom of such a nomination as that of Mr. Maynard may well be queried.

ibid;17: A Falsehood Squelched.

Carr is just as sober in his habits and just a warm a friend of temperance principles as Judge Maynard, though it is possible that he never voted for prohibition.—[Kingston Freeman.

Judge Maynard never voted for prohibition.

He was never called upon to vote for or against such a proposition.

In 1869 a law was passed authorizing the granting of ale and beer licenses to other than Hotel Keepers.

In 1877 a New York Assemblyman introduced a bill so as to include alcoholic liquors and covering all the towns, villages and cities of the State. It was in no sense a party question. Democrats and Republicans voted on both sides, and Mr. Maynard was one of the Democrats who voted against it. The bill was defeated and Mr. Maynard’s position has been sustained by every Legislature since, including those in which his party has had absolute control.

While the Secretary of State has no more to do with the excise law than has the Shah of Persia, the falsehood concerning Judge Maynard’s vote of six years ago will not be permitted to go unchallenged.

1894, 5: 17 Feb., 4, 1:

“Judge Maynard’s Record, It May Deprive Him of the Attorney Generalship.

He Expects the Nomination—Some of His Votes on Excise Measures in the Assembly—His Memorable Defeat.” New York Times, 28 Aug., 1891, [Clip;51]:

Albany, Aug. 27.—For several weeks the friends of Isaac H. Maynard, who holds the positions of Deputy Attorney General on the Democratic State ticket this Fall. When questioned as to the matter Mr. Maynard told The Times’s reporter that he expected to be tendered the nomination, and intimated that he expected to be on the ticket. His friends say that Mr. Maynard makes no claim of being entitled to this recognition, but would like to have the nomination and would then leave to the voters the question as to whether he is fitted for the position.

Judge Maynard was the candidate for Secretary of State on the Democratic ticket in 1883, and was defeated because of his strong prohibition views. He thinks that by this time most of that prejudice has disappeared, and that he would be as strong as any person placed in the race for the office. His friends are of opinion that the State Engineer and Surveyor will be taken either from Albany, by selecting Elnathan Sweet, or from Rensselaer, by the choice of Martin Schenck, and this would, according to the policy of taking no two candidates from one locality, debar the selection of an Albany man for the position. These friends also argue that Mr. Franklin Bartlett could not be thought of, because he comes from New-York City, which is virtually the home of Mr. Roswell P. Flower, ...

Although Judge Maynard is honest in his convictions and candidacy, it would seem that he could not with consistency be again placed on the State ticket, the one disastrous event when he was at the head being enough.

People do not forget as quickly as Judge Maynard hopes. This is shown in an editorial article in the Albany Times of Wednesday, which reads:

“Deputy Attorney General Maynard announces that he is a candidate for the Attorney Generalship. Mr. Maynard fell outside the breastwork eight years ago, but he has been well cared for ever since. There is a disposition, however, to let bygones be bygones, and in a place lower than the head of the ticket he might not endanger its success.”

The Times opposed Mr. Maynard in 1883, before the convention, and gave him a lukewarm support during the campaign.

Hornellsville Evening Tribune, 22 Aug., 1891, n.p. [Clip;50]:

The Tribune desires to propose the name of the Hon. Isaac ^H^ Maynard of Delaware Co., for the nomination of Attorney General, on the democratic state ticket. Judge Maynard is the present deputy Attorney General, and was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury and Mr. Cleveland’s administration. He is in every way well-fitted for the position by his learning his natural abilities and his past experience, every one of which furnishes ample qualification for the place. His personal character is of the highest and purest, and no man can be placed on the ticket who would adorn it more than would he. He is a man in the prime and vigor of life, courteous, brave and true. It would certainly afford us much personal pleasure to advocate his election.

Judge ^Isaac H^ Maynard, The Facts Relative to the Contested Election Cases, Report Adopted by the Legislature, A Manly Letter, Albany?, 1892?, nypl seh pv 9; some pamphlets in this bound coll. marked J Hill, Sterne Collection, etc.:

These cases were among the very last in which I acted as attorney Looking back through the years in which I have practiced at the bar, there is no work of my professional life which I regard with more satisfaction and pride than my conduct of them. There was no act done, no advice given by me, which I would not in all things repeat under like circumstances.

I entered upon the conduct of the cases without compensation or the hope of compensation, and from a sense of duty only and my sole reward has been that which arises from a consciousness of duty performed. Very respectfully, Isaac H Maynard, Albany, March 16, 1892. Joint committees on the Judiciary of the senate and assembly finds Maynard innocent of any wrong doing.

The Argus, “Judicial Nominations.” 20 Jan., 1892, n.p., [Clip;loose]:

Yesterday Gov. Flower nominated and the senate confirmed Judge Robert Earl as chief judge of the Court of Appeals, to succeed the late Chief Judge Ruger, and the Hon. Isaac H. Maynard as associate judge, to succeed Judge Earl, promoted...

The Hon. Isaac H. Maynard, confirmed as associate judge of the Court of Appeals is well known to the public, the party and the profession in this State. He has been county judge of Delaware, a member of the assembly, twice deputy attorney-general, assistant secretary of the treasury during President Cleveland’s administration, and one of the commissioners to codify the laws of the State. In all of these positions he has shown himself to be a man of great industry, a lawyer of rare acumen and of great intellectual resources. As the youngest, as well as the newest, judge of the Court of Appeals, his judicial reputation is yet to be made, but his success in other stations of trust, calling for varied attainments, we are confident will follow him to the bench of the highest court in the State. Judge Maynard was employed as one of the counsel on the Democratic side in the recent contested senate cases, and was successful. For this reason, the Republican members of the senate voted against his confirmation. Such an act on the part of laymen is intelligible; but the members of the bar among the Republican senator did themselves no honor by refusing to follow the courtesies of the profession and to recognize its customs.

Under the constitution, the electors of the State, next November, will be called upon to choose a chief judge of the Court of Appeals. Should Judge Earl be elected his position as associate judge will be vacant again, and must be filled by appointment until filled by election in November, 1893. If Judge Earl should not be elected chief judge in November, he resumes his position as associate judge.

“For Secretary of State, Isaac H. Maynard...” undated clipping, 1893, Clip;13:

pl. “[From Harper’s Weekly.]” Judge Isaac Horton Maynard, the nominee for Secretary of State was born in Bovina, Delaware county, April 9, 1838. His grandfather was a revolutionary soldier. His maternal ancestry was Scotch. After tuition in the common schools until 1854, Mr. Maynard spent four years at Stamford Academy, and four more from 1858 to 1862, in Amherst College, where he was valedictorian of his class. His preceptor in law was Justice William Murray, of the State Supreme Court, and he came to the bar in 1863. He was president of the village of Stamford from 1870 to 1877 being also a member of the County Board of Supervisors in 1869 and 1870, and its chairman during the latter year. In 1875 he was elected to the Assembly from Delaware county, by a majority of 549 over George G. Decker, Republican, who had been chosen in 1874 by 699 majority. In 1876 he was re-elected by 166 votes over James Oliver, Republican, although Hayes electors that year had 146 majority in the district. In 1877 he was elected Judge of the county of Delaware by about 1,500 majority, the Republican State ticket receiving some 500 majority at the same election. These numerous endorsements of Judge Maynard by the people among whom he was reared, are emphatic testimonials to his worth and popularity. His record as a consistent Democrat is impeachable. In the prime of life, of fine culture, high character and varied experience, he makes an excellent head of the ticket.

For six years he has been on the bench removed from the strifes of faction and clash of parties. His record proves him a man of resolution, principle, wisdom and learning, who will strengthen and adorn the public service.

—1892—

David B. Hill, Letter to Hon. Isaac H. Maynard “Attorney General’s Office, Albany, N.Y.,” Albany, 5 Jan., 1892:

My Dear Judge: Please draw petition for contst for Mr Cameron of Warren County. The enclosed is a statement of the facts. However, make it very general in terms so as to include everything. Very truly yours, David B. Hill

—1893—

David B. Hill, Letter to Hon. I.H. Maynard “Stamford, Delaware Co., N.Y., Personal,” 5 Sept., 1893:

My dear Judge:—
Enclosed find application duly approved as requested. I do not make any “requests” of the various departments. I am here for a few days enjoying the cool weather and looking after things generally.

There was no significance in the late convention except to discover the other side and to give us a short and vigorous campaign. Everything looks reasonably well.

I assume that our friends in Delaware County are on the alert. They must look after the back towns; the other side are promising post-offices very liberally. That is our only danger.

Your County convention should be held early and endorse the national and state administrations and endorse you for the Court of Appeals. The sooner it is done the better. With kindest regards, I remain,

Very truly yours, David B. Hill [signed]

David B. Hill, Letter to Isaac H. Maynard “Stamford, Delaware Co., N.Y., United States Senate, Personal,” 10 Oct., 1893:

My dear Judge:—
Permit me to suggest to you that the case of the people on the relation of Armatage Vs. Manning, Mayor etc., which is upon the motion calendar of the Court of Appeals, should be heard on Monday or Tuesday next if possible, and promptly disposed of. It involves the question of one hundred and fifty Inspectors of Election in Albany City, and I believe the appeal is in the interest of pure elections in that city.

The public interests, it seems to me, require a speedy decision of the questions involved. I trust I have made no improper suggestion. Trusting you are well, and with kindest regards, I remain
Very truly yours, David B. Hill [signed]

Thomas J. Kenna, Letter to David B. Hill, “Headquarters of the Kings County Democratic General Committee, Thomas Jefferson, No. 4 and 5 Court Square, Brooklyn, N.Y.,” 9 Oct., 1893:

Hon. David B. Hill
Dear Sir: After Consultation with Mr. Hugh McLaughlin I am requested to state to you that the opening meeting of our Campaign will be held at the Academy of Music on the 23rd inst. and it is thought that Judge Maynard should be the principal speaker provided you approve the suggestion and will communicate with the Judge to that end. Will you kindly advise me in the matter at your earliest convenience addressing “Hall of Records Brooklyn” and marking “Personal” with the superscription }
Yours Truly Tho J Kenna Campaign Com.

David B. Hill, Letter to Isaac H. Maynard “<Stamford, Delaware Co., N.Y.> Albany New York, “United States Senate, Personal,” 10 Oct., 1893:

My dear Judge:— I have received the enclosed letter. Please make such answer to it as you deem proper. I have written Mr. Kenna, saying that I had forwarded the letter to you for you personally to make reply.

Congratulating you on the unanimous work of the Convention, and with kindest regards, I remain Very truly yours, David B. Hill [signed]

"Maynard was a contemptible conspirator, a conscienceless liar, a miserable sneak thief, a brazen faced scoundrel and a dangerous felon," New York Tribune, “Beginning the Fight,” 19 Oct., 1893, n.p., [Clipping, loose]:

Charles A. Scheiren Makes His First Speech in the Campaign. The Young Republican Club of Brooklyn Pledges its Support to its Ex-President—Many cheering Words for the Ticket and Strong Condemnation of Maynard.

...Mr. Schieren resigned from the presidency of the club upon his nomination for Mayor, and ex-Senator Stephen M. Griswold was elected to succeed him... Maynard’s Nomination Denounced

C.F. Bishop and Daniel G. Harriman spoke in advocacy of Mr. Schieren’s election. Mr. Harriman also denounced the candidacy of Judge Maynard for the Court of Appeals. He said: “No more unfit man could have been nominated. He was responsible for the Dutchess County steal. He conspired to count out Senators who had been elected. By villainous frauds a false return was secured of Dutchess County. Then Maynard lied in order to get the true return back. He then stole the return and committed a crime for which he should be serving a term in State Prison. Maynard aided in perpetrating the greatest fraud of the century, by which the State was handed over to the worst band of political devils ever in power. Maynard acted the part of a felon in the greatest election crime ever perpetrated in a Northern State. Maynard was a contemptible conspirator, a conscienceless liar, a miserable sneak thief, a brazen faced scoundrel and a dangerous felon and yet the Democratic party was trying to pay him for his services. Cheers for Mr. Schieren...

Obituaries

Isaac Horton Maynard lived in the Kenmore Hotel in Albany and died here in the summer of 1898.
Kenmore BW sidseimage2.jpg

Ex Judge Maynard Dead Killed by Heart Disease in the Hotel Kenmore, Albany. Career of the Judge Whose Nomination Swamped the Democratic Party—His Actions Regarding the Dutchess County Returns in 1891—The General Protest from All Parties Caused by His Proceedings in that Historical Case. d 1896, 534; 13 June, 1896 1-3

Albany, June 12.—Ex-Judge Isaac H. Maynard, senior member of the law firm of Maynard, Gilbert & Cone, and former Judge of the Court of Appeals, died suddenly in his room at the Kenmore Hotel in this city, about 2:30 o’clock this afternoon, from heart trouble. He was alone in his room and was sitting in a chair at the time of his death. He had just finished his luncheon, and was apparently in the best of health, except that he had been undergoing treatment lately for indigestion. During the morning he had been at his office as usual. As soon as the ex-Judge’s death was discovered, which was after 3 o’clock, a physician was called. The Coroner also was summoned and took charge of the body.

Judge Maynard leaves a wife and daughter, who have been living at the family home, at Delhi, Delaware County. They were telegraphed to immediately.

The fact that Judge Maynard was troubled somewhat with his heart was known among a few intimate friends, he having had an attack while in their company at Winnosook Lodge, in the Catskills, a couple of years ago. Expressions of sorrow were universal on Capitol Hill at the announcement of his death.

Judge F. R. Gilbert of Judge Maynard’s firm arrived here tonight and took charge of the remains, which will be taken tomorrow on the Delaware and Hudson Road to Delhi. The funeral will be held at the latter place Sunday afternoon at 2 o’clock.


Isaac Horton Maynard was born at Bovina, Delaware County, April 9, 1838. He was of Scotch and English descent, and all his life his home was at Bovina or the neighboring town of Stamford. He was graduated from Amherst College, and in 1862 began the study of law, at Delhi, and in 1865 was admitted to the bar, and began the practice of law. His entrance into public life was as the Supervisor of his township, and subsequently he was elected President of the Board of Supervisors of Delaware County.

He was a member of the Assembly in 1876 and 1877, and in the latter year was elected County and Probate Judge for the term of eight years. Before his term had expired he was nominated, in 1883, for Secretary of State on the Democratic ticket, but was defeated by Gen. Carr. At the expiration of his term as County Judge, in 1885, he was appointed First Deputy Attorney General, and later in the same year he was called to Washington, and was appointed Second Controller of the United States Treasury by President Cleveland, under Daniel Manning, then Secretary of the Treasury. When Charles S. Fairchild was promoted to be Secretary of the Treasury, Judge Maynard was made Assistant Secretary, and held that position until the end of Mr. Cleveland’s first Administration. Then he was again appointed a Deputy Attorney General of this State. It was while Judge Maynard was in the service as Deputy Attorney General that the incident occurred which brought him into unenviable prominence, and resulted in the defeat of the Democratic Party in this State, and placed the State Government into the hands of the Republicans.

The election for Senators had been so close in the Fall of 1891 that it was discovered that the control of the upper branch of the Legislature would probably hinge on the election in Dutchess County. The question of the reapportionment of the State was to come up before the Legislature of 1892, and the complexion of future Legislatures might depend on the reapportionment. When the voters of Dutchess County were canvassed, thirty-one Republican ballots were found in what came to be known as the “Mylod” district, which had ink marks on their edges which could have been made printers quads. The Democratic canvasser asserted that the marks rendered the ballots defective, and they rejected them. As upon the district the political complexion of the State Senate was believed to depend, the Republicans made a contest for the thirty-one rejected ballots which was carried into the courts.

Judge Maynard acted in the litigation as counsel for the Dutchess County Board of Canvassers, Justice Barnard granted a peremptory mandamus ordering the county canvassers to count the rejected ballots and transmit the corrected returns to Albany. Meanwhile Gov. Hill had removed from office the Republican County Clerk because he had refused to transmit the returns as the Democrats wanted them, and appointed a Democratic County Clerk, and the “Mylod” returns were made up. Emans, the Republican County Clerk, who had been removed during the litigation, which was very complicated, mailed the corrected returns to Albany. He, however, had been enjoined by an order of the court from doing so, and he hurried to Albany and called on Maynard and requested that the returns be given back to him, but they had disappeared, and when the State Board of Canvassers met the “Mylod” returns were canvassed, and Osborne was declared elected, thus giving the State Senate to the Democrats. The connection of Judge Maynard with the disappearance of the corrected returns mailed by County Clerk Emans did not become known until after Gov. Flower had appointed him to fill a vacancy on the Court of Appeals bench, caused by the advancement of Judge Earl to the Chief Justice’s chair on the death of Chief Justice Ruger. It created a storm of indignation throughout the State, and there was a general feeling that Judge Maynard ought to resign. He addressed a letter to Chief Justice Early explaining his conduct. The Bar Association took the matter up, and finally the Legislature was compelled to order an investigation. The result was a majority and a minority report. The former was adopted, and Judge Maynard was practically exonerated. When, however, Gov. Flower announced his intention of re-appointing Judge Maynard as Associate Justice to succeed Judge Charles Andrews, the Bar Association made strong protest, but he was appointed.

Despite the vigorous protests of many prominent Democrats in the State Judge Maynard was nominated for the Court of Appeals on the Democratic ticket. The nomination raised a storm of indignation throughout the State. The Bar Association took a prominent part in the canvass against him, and without regard to party advocated the election of Edward T. Bartlett, the Republican candidate. Mass meetings were held in this city to protest against the election of Maynard, and the chief interest in the election centered in the contest between Maynard and Bartlett. Maynard proved too heavy a load for the Democratic ticket and swamped it. The entire Republican State ticket was elected. The Republicans also obtained a majority of the delegates to the Constitutional Convention. Maynard was beaten by 101,664 votes. Since that time he had been in comparative obscurity.

Judge Maynard’s widow is a daughter of Charles Marvine, President of the Delaware National Bank at Delhi, N.Y.

—1898—

New York Times, 15 June, 6-2

New York Times, 1032, 19 Oct., 1898;6:

"Funeral of Maynard," Elmira Gazette and Free Press, Elmira, Chemung Co. New York, Tues. June 16, 1896

At Delhi Yesterday--A Number of Lawyers and Others Present

Stamford (N.Y.), June 15--The funeral of Hon. Isaac H. Maynard, senior member of the law firm of Maynard, Gilbert & Cone, and ex-judge of the Court of Appeals, who died in the Kenmore house, Albany, on Friday, was held from the First Presbyterian church at Delhi, N.Y. to-day at 2 0'clock. Rev. L.E. Richards, of Stamford, officiated.

Nearly the entire bar of Delaware county were present. The attendance was unusually large, and especially from Stamford (N.Y.) where Mr. Maynard had resided for many years.

His former associates on the bench of the Court of Appeals and many others who were unable to be present sent telegrams of condolence.

Dr. Milbank, of Albany, and Charles M. Preston, ex-Superintendent of Banking, of New York city, were present. Memorials services will be held here in the First Presbyterian church in the near future and many of the prominent men with whom Mr. Maynard was associated and who were unable to be present to-day have signified their intention of attending. The interment was at Delhi.

New York Times, 15 June, 1896, 6:

Ex-Judge Maynard’s Funeral. Many Members of the Delaware County Bar present—Memorial Service. Delhi, N.Y., June 13.—Funeral services over the body of Isaac H. Maynard senior member of the law firm of Maynard, Gilbert & Cone and ex-Judge of the Court of Appeals...were held in the first Presbyterian Church at 2 o’clock this afternoon, the Rev. L.E. Richards officiating. Nearly all the members of the bar of Delaware County were present. The attendance was unusually large, especially from Stamford, where Mr. Maynard lived for many years. His former associates on the bench of the Court of Appeals and many other who was unable to be present sent telegrams of condolence. ...the body was buried here.

—1902—

The Syracuse Herald, Evening. 31 October, 1902, 4:

Who put Isaac H. Maynard upon the Court of Appeals bench. An irrelevant and truly organic argument. It is not the record of the Democratic party or of the late Judge Maynard that the people will pass upon when voting for Judge of the court of appeals next Tuesday. It is the record of Judge Gray. If there is a single blemish on that record why hasn't it been pointed out

Allan Nevins, Grover Cleveland, A Study In Courage, NY, 1932, pp. 569-570: Two years earlier one of Hill’s friends, Isaac H Maynard, as deputy attorney-general and acting counsel for the board of State canvassers, had committed a scandalous robbery of public records in order to destroy an election return from Dutchess County, and thus make certain of Democratic control of the State Senate. The State Bar Association appointed a committee to investigate this outrageous occurrence, among its members being Hornblower, James C Carter, Frederic R Courdert, and Elihu Root. Its report was scathing. It held both Hill and Maynard guilty of an utterly unjustifiable crime, and declared the latter’s offense “one of the gravest known to the law” [Dated March 22, 1892; published NY Tribune, Oct. 7, 1893]. Largely because of the vigor with which it appealed to public sentiment, when Maynard was subsequently nominated for the Court of Appeals he was defeated by more than 100,000 plurality, a crushing rebuke to him and Hill. ...In effect, Hill and Murphy had declared before the nation that no man who had ever opposed Maynard on account of an act which was branded as a felony by the laws should have a chance to sit on the Supreme Court; and further, that the Senate was bound by the rule of Senatorial courtesy to make good this proclamation. All independent newspapers termed this an outrage of the first order. [Hornblower’s Memorandum, Cleveland Papers, Harpers Weekly, Feb 10, 1894.]

Amherst Biographical Record, Centennial Edition (1821-1921)

Published in 1927, the Amherst College Biographical Record, Centennial Edition, contains biographical sketches of all 9,110 graduates and non-graduates of Amherst College in the classes of 1822 to 1921, plus brief information about the classes of 1922 to 1925. • 1499. *Maynard, Isaac Horton.  S. of Isaac and Jane (Falconer), b. Bovina, N. Y., Ap. 9, 1838.  M. A., A. C., 1867.  Phi Beta Kappa; Delta Kappa Epsilon.

Prepared Stamford (N. Y.) Sem.  Studied law with William Murray, Delhi, N. Y.; admitted to bar, N., 1863; practised Delhi, N. Y., 1863-65; Stamford, N. Y., 1865-67; county judge and surrogate, 1877-84; 1st deputy Attorney-General, 1884-85; comptroller U. S. Treasury, 1885-87; asst. sec. of the treasury, 1887-89; appointed by Governor of N. Y. a commissioner to revise general laws of N. Y., 1889-90; 1st deputy Attorney-General, 1890-92; associate judge. Court of Appeals, 1892-93; in law firm of Maynard, Gilbert & Cone, Albany, N. Y., 1893-96.  Member N. Y. State Legislature, 1876-77.  D. Albany, N. Y., Je. 12, 1896.

Married Je. 28, 1871, Margaret M., da. of Charles Marvine, Delhi, N. Y.  Ch. 1 da.

Isaac Horton Maynard (1838-1896) 
Court of Appeals: 1892-1893 by Jason C. Rubinstein

Whatever his gifts as a judge, history remembers Isaac Horton Maynard more for the questionable conduct that allegedly won him appointment to the Court of Appeals than for his decisions or comportment on the bench. The degree of ignominy associated with Maynard's name is as tragic as his downfall, especially given his ability and the abundant promise he exhibited early in his career. Although largely forgotten today, the scandal that dogged Maynard was well known and widely reported to his contemporaries, and it represents one of the more colorful incidents in the Court's past.

Isaac Maynard was born in Bovina, in Delaware County, New York on April 9, 1838 to Isaac and Jane (Falconer) Maynard. His great-grandfather, Isaiah Maynard, emigrated to Westchester County from the north of England about 1750. His grandfather, Elisha B. Maynard, distinguished himself as a soldier during the Revolutionary War and afterwards settled in Bovina. His father, Isaac, was prominent in the town, serving as Magistrate for over two decades.

In September 1854, at the age of 16, Maynard entered the Stamford Seminary, where he prepared for college. In 1858, he matriculated at Amherst College, where he was a member of the Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity and Phi Beta Kappa. Maynard was graduated from Amherst with high honors and as valedictorian in 1862, taking prizes for Greek and extemporaneous speech.

In his valedictory address, entitled "The English Constitution," Maynard traced the development of England's legal tradition from the Thirteenth Century. He singled out for praise both Magna Carta's role as the "corner-stone of English liberty" and, notwithstanding the at-times despotic character of his reign, Henry VIII's apparent teaching that "might is as essential as right, and that power is one of the conditions of justice" (Amherst College, Alumni Biographical Files). Maynard then identified that "strong arm of royal authority" as "the sentinel of English liberty" (id.). Turning from this curious embrace of monarchical absolutism, Maynard praised the Glorious Revolution of 1688 as ushering in a new epoch of British political development, one characterized by freedom, stability, and the rule of law.

After leaving Amherst, Maynard studied law with William Murray and, in November 1863, he was admitted to the bar at Binghamton. From 1863-1865, he practiced law in Delhi. In 1865, Maynard settled in Stamford, in Delaware County, and formed a law partnership with his cousin, F.R. Gilbert. Shortly thereafter, Maynard was elected Supervisor of the Town. In this capacity, he was instrumental in securing the incorporation of the Village of Stamford by special act of the Legislature in 1870. Maynard then served as first president of the Village, winning unanimous reelection for ten years in succession. Continuing his career in local government, Maynard served as President of the Board of Supervisors of Delaware County in 1869 and 1870. He married Margaret Marvine on June 28, 1871.

In 1875, Maynard won election to the State Assembly, where he served from 1876 to 1877. In 1877, he was elected Judge and Surrogate of Delaware County, for an eight-year term. Maynard grew in prominence and in 1883 he was nominated to run on the Democratic ticket for Secretary of State of New York. Here, Maynard suffered his first political setback, losing to the Republican incumbent Joseph Carr by 18,583 votes. Contemporary observers attributed Maynard's loss to his support for temperance measures while in the Assembly, a position that alienated much of the statewide Democratic base. Maynard's was the deciding vote against one bill that would have abolished the requirement that bar owners maintain in their homes at least three beds to let.

In January 1884, Maynard was appointed First Deputy Attorney General of the State under Attorney General Denis O'Brien, who would serve on the Court of Appeals from 1890 to 1907. Maynard resigned after less than a year in that post to become Second Comptroller of the United States Treasury under President Grover Cleveland. In 1887, when Charles S. Fairchild replaced Daniel Manning as Secretary of the Treasury, Maynard was made Assistant Secretary. In this capacity, he oversaw the Customs Service, the Internal Revenue Service and numerous other agencies. He held that position until the end of Cleveland's first term in 1889.

On May 22, 1889, Governor David B. Hill appointed Maynard to a committee charged with revising the general laws of the State. Maynard also returned to his former position as Deputy Attorney General of New York. His tenure in this second post indelibly colored the remainder of his public life.

In the Fall of 1891, control of the State Senate hinged on four seats, including the Fifteenth Senate District, in Dutchess County. The stakes were high. In 1892, the Legislature was scheduled to take up the issue of reapportionment. Both parties scrambled for any tactical advantage, and the Democrats identified what they claimed was a fatal irregularity: a number of Republican ballots from Dutchess County had ink marks on their edges. Democratic canvassers insisted that the marks rendered the ballots defective and rejected them accordingly. The Republicans challenged this determination. Nevertheless, the County Board of Canvassers generated a set of returns favoring Edward B. Osborne, the Democrat. Storm Emans who, as the Republican County Clerk, served as ex officio Secretary of the Board of Canvassers, refused to authenticate this set of returns. The Democrats appointed John J. Mylod as Secretary pro tem of the board, and he certified the returns favoring Osborne. Emans, meanwhile, certified his own set of returns, favoring Osborne's Republican opponent, and forwarded them to Albany.

In the ensuing litigation, Maynard represented the Democrats. Reduced to its essentials, the election controversy concerned whether the "Mylod" (i.e., Democratic) or "Emans" (i.e., Republican) returns should be canvassed. The Court of Appeals proffered its resolution on December 29, 1891 in People ex rel Daley v. Rice (129 NY 449 [1891]). In Daley, the Court ruled in favor of the Republicans, holding that, while the Mylod returns were technically proper on their face, the Democrats neither denied nor contradicted Republican allegations that the Dutchess County Board of Elections had "illegally canvassed the result of the returns" (id. at 460). The Court concluded that, as the Mylod returns "contained the result of an illegal and erroneous canvass . . . which thereby would alter the results of an election, the court should not permit it to be canvassed" (id.). The decision became immediate dead letter. On December 29, 1891, the same day the Court handed down Daley, the State Board of Canvassers met and, with Maynard in attendance, canvassed the Mylod return, giving the Democrats a pivotal Senate seat. The Emans return was, it seems, nowhere to be found. Maynard said nothing. Given that he was responsible for the physical removal of the Emans return from the State Comptroller's office, perhaps it would have been awkward for him to speak up. The New York Times explained how Maynard -- as counsel for the Democrats—intercepted the Emans return:

"Justice Barnard granted a peremptory mandamus ordering the county canvassers to count the rejected ballots and transmit the corrected returns to Albany. Meanwhile, Gov. Hill had removed from office the Republican County Clerk because he had refused to transmit the returns as the Democrats wanted them, and appointed a Democratic County Clerk, and the 'Mylod' returns were made up. Emans, the Republican County Clerk, who had been removed during the litigation, which was very complicated, mailed the corrected returns to Albany. He, however, had been enjoined by an order of the court from doing so, and he hurried to Albany and called on Maynard and requested that the returns be given back to him, but they had disappeared, and when the State Board of Canvassers met the 'Mylod' returns were canvassed, and [the Democratic candidate Edward B.] Osborne was declared elected, giving the State Senate to the Democrats." (Ex-Judge Maynard Dead, NY Times, June 13, 1896, at 1).

In a speech to the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, James C. Carter gave a similar account of the allegations against Maynard:

"There were certain election returns forwarded by the County Clerk . . . to three offices, one of them to the office of the Controller. These returns . . . were lawful returns. . . . While they were in the office of the Controller, it appears that Deputy Attorney General Isaac H. Maynard took those returns from that office without official authority. . . . It is also part of the fact, and it tends to give it a great importance, to furnish in the mind of every one a motive, that this removal of the returns enabled another return, which has been adjudged to be illegal, to be canvassed by the Board of State Canvassers, and led to the declaration that a candidate was elected in the place of another, who, it would appear, would otherwise have been elected" (To Investigate Maynard, NY Times, March 9, 1892, at 1).

In January 1892, following the canvassing of the "Mylod" returns and the Democratic electoral victory, Maynard was appointed by Governor Roswell P. Flower, a Democrat, to fill a vacancy as Associate Judge on the New York Court of Appeals left by the elevation of Robert Earl to Chief Judge. His appointment aroused immediate indignation. The New York Times characterized it as a quid pro quo for Maynard's purloining of the Emans returns: "Maynard was simply [Governor] Hill's tool in these scandalous operations, and his promotion to the bench of the court of last resort as a reward for services to the Democratic Party must give a shock to every lawyer and citizen who believes in maintaining the purity of elections and integrity of the bench" (Maynard Gets His Pay, NY Times, January 20, 1892, at 1). In March 1892, the Legislature commenced an investigation and the Association of the Bar of the City of New York formed a nine-member committee, which included Elihu Root, William B. Hornblower, and Frederic B. Coudert, to conduct its own inquiry.

On March 16, 1892, Maynard responded to the controversy with a 19-page open letter addressed to Robert Earl, Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals.1 Maynard first stated that he had been retained by the State Board of Canvassers in a private, not official capacity. He then argued that the parties in the Dutchess County litigation had stipulated to submit their controversy -- i.e., whether Mylod, as Secretary pro tem of the Dutchess County Board of Canvassers, had properly authenticated the pro-Democratic election returns -- to the courts and, ultimately, the Court of Appeals for resolution. Maynard further argued that, by forwarding an amended set of returns to the Governor, Secretary of State, and Comptroller, Emans had violated this stipulation, along with two judicially imposed stays. Maynard also reported that, on the morning of December 22, 1891, Emans had called on him in Albany, explained that Republican officials had intimidated him into forwarding the new set of returns, and told Maynard that he wished to rectify his mistake. Acting, he claimed, at Emans's behest, Maynard recovered the returns from the Comptroller's office and restored them to Emans, who, meanwhile, had recovered the returns he had forwarded to the Governor and Secretary of State.

Maynard also defended himself against the charge that he should have alerted the State Board of Canvassers to the missing Emans returns, especially after the Court of Appeals handed down its decision in Daley:

"I was present as a spectator . . . at the public meeting of the Board. . . . The inquiry was addressed to members of the Board, and not to me, and I had no right to say anything upon the subject. But counsel knew, if they knew anything about the history of the case, that the [Emans] return had been sent back eight days before, and was not then in the possession of any member of the Board."

Paying short shrift to the Board's brazen dereliction of the Court's holding in Daley, Maynard then suggested that the Republicans, if they felt aggrieved, should have sought a mandamus to "compel the State officers to receive the [Emans] returns; and the whole question determined, as to whether, under the facts as they then existed, it was their duty to receive and retain them."

As anemic as this defense may appear, Maynard's allies in the Legislature rode to his rescue on April 19, 1892. The Legislature issued two reports, one authored by the Democratic majority, the other by the Republican minority. The Democratic report, which the Legislature's Democratic majority subsequently adopted, cleared Maynard and labeled the controversy a Republican conspiracy. Emans's initial decision to forward the amended returns to the Secretary of State and Comptroller were, the Democrats found, illegal and in violation of two injunctive orders from Supreme Court. In intercepting the returns at the Comptroller's office and returning them to Emans, Maynard, the majority report determined, was acting with the full authority of the Comptroller and in accordance with Supreme Court's decrees.

By contrast, the Republican members of the Assembly and Senate Judiciary committees condemned both Maynard's conduct during the canvassing as well as the investigation undertaken by their colleagues in the majority.2 They argued that, when Maynard took the returns from the Comptroller's office, he deprived the State Board of Canvassers of the true election results and committed a crime in unlawfully removing public documents without authority.

The Association of the Bar of the City of New York also returned its report, declaring Maynard unfit for the judiciary. Because Maynard was not on the Court when he committed his offense, the committee concluded, impeachment did not lie. Nevertheless, the report urged the Legislature to remove Maynard by joint resolution. The Albany Law Journal praised the report and its recommendations: "In our judgment, this document deserves, indeed, demands, prompt, serious and unpartisan attention of the Legislature. . . . The charges are so weighty and so closely concern the propriety of his conduct as a lawyer and his fitness to occupy a place on the bench as entirely to remove the discussion from the region of politics" (45 Alb LJ 287 [1892])3.

The Legislature disregarded the Association's report. Notwithstanding the controversy dogging Maynard, in December 1892, Governor Flower reappointed him to another one-year term as Associate Judge. He did so over the protests of many in the press and at the bar. For this second term, Maynard filled the vacancy left by Charles Andrews, who was promoted to Chief Judge. Maynard remained on the bench through December 31, 1893. The scandal surrounding his appointment aside, Maynard was an active and productive member of the Court of Appeals during his short time on the tribunal. The Albany Law Journal noted that Maynard's "relations with the other members of the court have apparently been most cordial and friendly, and there has been nothing to indicate that the judges occupying the bench regard his conduct . . . as in any way derogatory to his character or affecting his standing as a member of the bench" (48 Alb LJ 341 [1893]). Maynard's opinions were heavily civil in their complexion, with criminal appeals representing only a modest portion of his judicial work. Although none of his writings are of surpassing prominence, they nevertheless evidence a thoughtful character. By his opinion inManhattan Life Insurance Co v. Forty second Street and Grand Street Ferry Railroad Co. (139 NY 146 [1893]), the Court held that a railroad company was not liable for a loan secured by its president by pledging as collateral corporate stock certificates when the president lacked the authority -- actual or apparent -- to issue certificates of stock (but cf Fifth Avenue Bank of New York v. Forty second Street and Grand Street Ferry Railroad Company, 137 NY 231 [1893] [holding, in an opinion by Judge Maynard, that a corporation was liable for a corporate officer's forgery of a stock certificate to secure a loan when the issuance of stock certificates was within the scope of his authority and course of his employment]). In Parker v. Marco (136 NY 585, 589 [1893]), he affirmed the principle that an out-of-state witness called to New York to attend court "in an action to which he is a party or in which he is to be sworn as a witness" is exempt from service of process while in the State. In Condict v. Cowdrey (139 NY 273 [1893]), he determined that a real estate broker was not entitled to a commission when, through no fault of the broker, the buyer was unable to secure marketable title.

In 1893, Maynard ran for a full term on the Court of Appeals, on the Democratic ticket. Citing his conduct during the 1891 election, the Association of the Bar of the City of New York denounced his nomination, with only three members dissenting from the resolution. Likewise, the New York Tribune commented "[i]t is not easy to reconcile such a nomination as that of Maynard with the belief that the people are intelligent, honest, anxious to get justice done and fit for the responsibilities of self-government" (The Case of Judge Maynard, NY Tribune, October 8, 1893). When it flocked to the polls, the electorate manifested a similar sentiment: Maynard's Republican opponent, Edward T. Bartlett beat him by over 100,000 votes statewide, a staggering margin at the time. The degree of popular indignation aroused by Maynard was so great that he dragged down the rest of the Democratic ticket, leaving the Republicans with control of both houses of the Legislature and the 1894 constitutional convention. Although it gave Democrats a temporary majority in the Legislature, the 1891 election scandal ultimately precipitated a backlash against bossism and Tammany. It also dealt a severe blow to the presidential aspirations of Maynard's longtime patron David Hill, who purportedly contrived the Democrats' theft of the contested Senate seats, and resulted in 16 years of Republican control over State government.

Having lost election to a full term, Maynard left the Court at the end of December 1893. Hill, now a member of the United States Senate, recommended him for appointment to the Supreme Court. President Cleveland ignored the suggestion. Maynard's defeat in 1893 thus marked the end of his public life, and he returned to the private practice of law, as a senior member of the firm of Maynard, Gilbert & Cone. He died of a heart attack on June 13, 1896, in his room at the Kenmare Hotel in Albany, and is buried in Delhi. Notwithstanding the brooding legal and ethical cloud that glowered over him, Maynard had defenders to the last. In their obituary, the editors of the Albany Law Journal described him as:

"a man of rare legal ability in his chosen profession. As judge of the Court of Appeals, he was regarded as one of the strongest members of the court, and his opinions were marked by great legal learning, and by a clear and precise application of the facts involved. For the past few years, most his practice was before the Court of Appeals, where his masterly arguments were generally marked by success. Judge Maynard was particularly thorough in practice, and his briefs, as well as opinions, were marked by logical argument and precise learning. The bar of this city and State have lost a most learned member and faithful student" (53 Alb LJ 385 [1896]).

It is regrettable that a man of such undeniable talent and acumen as Isaac Maynard would find his life and reputation so enmeshed in controversy.

PROGENY

Isaac and Margaret Marvine Maynard had one daughter, Frances Maynard. She married David Ford, with whom she had three children, including the grandmother of John Charles Harris of Dallas, Texas, President and Chief Executive Officer of Viseon, a communications company in Dallas. Judge Maynard's other living descendants are David Ford, of Lincoln, Massachusetts, married to Mary Gillingham. They are the parents of David Fairbanks Ford and Warren Ford.  

PUBLISHED WRITINGS

To date, we are not aware of any published writings by Judge Maynard.   ENDNOTES

Judge Maynard's open letter is available at http://galenet.galegroup.com. This sentiment enjoyed a great degree of resonance. The Albany Law Journal declared that the Democrats' "so-called" investigation a "one-sided inquiry" (45 Alb LJ 367 [1892]). The "partisan character of the proceedings was so evident and undisguised that the award will exercise no influence whatever with men who have any independence of party. . . . The legislative committee not only refused to allow Judge Maynard's accusers to produce any evidence, but undertook to conduct the investigation secretly at the last. Fair minded men will regret that an opportunity was not given to produce witnesses offered to contradict some assertions in Judge Maynard's letter, and that the Judge himself did not improve the opportunity afforded him of putting himself under oath. . . and that an opportunity was not afforded his accusers of cross-examining him" (id.). The Albany Law Journal further condemned Maynard's fitness for the bench: "Nor shall we shrink from expressing the opinion that the man who entertains such notions of professional honor and is held in such subservience by party ties, is not a fit person to sit in the highest court of this State, to be empowered possibly to dictate the result of future elections, and certainly to pass upon the conflicting private claims of suitors who may be members of the opposing political parties" (id.). See also 45 Alb LJ 248 (1892).

Political Sources

"Judge Isaac H Maynard The most talked of man in New York State to day" The Tammany Times, 17 Sept. 1893;3

Judge Isaac H Maynard The most talked of man in New York State to day is Judge Isaac Horton Maynard of the Court of Appeals.

The reason of his prominence at this time is the approaching State Democratic Convention at Saratoga at which he will be a candidate for the nomination to succeed himself and by which from present appearances he will be enthusiastically given the place on the ticket for which his friends are so loyally urging him and to which despite calumny his long and able record as a public servant entitles him. The attitude of the Republicans on the candidancy of Judge Maynard is a remarkable and ludicrous one. They contend that he is not a fit man for the position yet they claim that nothing could better please them than his nomination though they know that if he is nominated nothing in the future is more certain than his election. For once if the Republicans are telling the truth about their feelings they will be pleased for the chances are nine out of ten that the convention will say to Judge Maynard Well done Stay where you are. The Republicans however if he is chosen should be careful to extract all the pleasure they can from Judge Maynard's nomination previous to the day of election.

Judge Maynard is the son of Isaac and Jane Falconer Maynard and was born at Bovina, Delaware County, New York on April 9 1838. His grandfather was a soldier of the Revolution and his father, who died in 1876 at the advanced age of 82, was a magistrate for over 20 years. His Early Life Young Isaac showed early evidences of the ability that was in him. He worked on his father's farm until he was 16 years old going to the district school in the meantime and in 1854 he entered the Stamford Seminary where he was prepared for college In September 1858 he entered Amherst College from which he was graduated with honor in 1862 taking prizes for excellence in Greek and for extemporaneous debate besides being his class valedictorian.

Immediately after graduation he entered the law office of the late Judge William Murray and was admitted to the Bar in Binghampton in November 1863. He practiced law in Delhi until 1865 when he removed to Stamford his present home and formed a law partnership with his cousin F.R. Gilbert which continued until January 1878. In 1871 he married Miss Margaret Marvine of Delhi by whom he has had one child Frances Maynard aged 17.

The public record of Judge Maynard can best be told in his own words as they have been recently uttered. In speaking of himself he said

His Public Record
"My record as a public officer is a long one and I look back on it with a sense of satisfaction It began in 1875 when I was practising law in Delaware County. Governor Tilden requested me to become a candidate for the Assembly He was anxious to secure control of the Legislature and as my district was Republican he wanted a candidate who would make a strong fight. I was unanimously nominated and was elected by a good majority Later on I was re-elected. Then I was elected County Judge and Surrogate. For six years I served in this capacity and then became the Democratic candidate for Secretary of State mainly through the efforts of Mr Manning, the Democratic leader of the State, Mr. Lamont, and other friends of Mr. Cleveland.

"After my defeat I was appointed First Deputy by Attorney General O'Brien in spite of my reluctance to take the office. In June 1885, at the request of President Cleveland and Mr Manning, I went to Washington as Second Comptroller of the Treasury. The resignation of Mr. Manning and the promotion of Mr. Fairchild resulted in a request on the part of the President and Secretary of the Treasury that I should take the post of Assistant Secretary. It was not so desirable as the office I then occupied but I yielded.

"At the end of Mr Cleveland's term I went back to my home. My law practice had drifted away. Governor Hill appointed me on the commission to revise the general laws of the State. Then I was appointed to my old post of Deputy Attorney General. When Chief Judge Ruger of the Court of Appeals died I went to the funeral at Syracuse. The train which brought me back to Albany carried the Judges of the Court of Appeals the Governor the Attorney General and many distinguished members of the Bar. The common topic of conversation was the choice of a successor to the place left vacant by the death of Judge Ruger. My name seemed to be agreed upon generally much to my surprise and gratification. When we got to Albany Governor Flower said, as we left the train

Named an Appellate Judge
"Mr. Maynard, I guess I ll have to make you a Judge of the Court of Appeals. Everybody seems to be for you and nobody seems to be against you." The very next day I was appointed. That is my official record It has been made in broad day light.

"My political record is simple I am a Democrat in the broadest sense. But my political record ceased when I became a Judge and no one has ever intimated that any of my judicial acts have had a political flavor. As a judge I have no political sympathies of course. As a private citizen I am in accord with the ideas of the Democratic leaders in the State and Nation. I feel sure that they all have kindly feelings for me."

As is well known the virulent Republican attacks on Judge Maynard are based upon his connection with the contested senatorial election cases of 1891. In speaking a few days ago of his judicial acts at that time he said, "With respect to my connection with the contested senatorial election cases of 1891, I have nothing now to say. In March 1892 I addressed a communication to the chief Judge of the Court of Appeals and of the Second Division of the court which contained a full and frank statement of every material fact relating to that subject which was widely published and which has never been successfully controverted and I am willing to stand upon that statement and be judged by it. The judicial committees of the two houses of the Legislature also made a report completely exonerating me and to that report and my letter to the chief Judge I refer all persons seeking information upon these points."

He Needs no Vindication
It has been recently declared that Judge Maynard had written, or was about to write, a letter declining in advance the nomination which he will probably receive. This is not true and in denying it Judge Maynard has also taken the pains to make clear his whole proposition in reference to his attitude before the coming convention.

NewKenmoreHotelAlbanyNY.jpg

"As to the proposition that I am to be nominated to succeed myself," he said, "I cannot pretend not to read the newspapers. But it would be manifestly improper for me to seek or even to appear to seek a nomination. The report that I have written or am about to write a letter declining in advance a nomination that has not been offered to me is hardly worth a denial. My record on the bench stands for itself. If the Democratic party sees fit to honor me with the nomination this year I shall regard it as the reward of my arduous official career. As for vindication I need none. My life is my vindication. An upright officer needs none other."

Sources for Jason C. Rubinstein

  • Amherst College, Alumni Biographical Files, Maynard, Isaac, H.
  • Bergan, The History of the New York Court of Appeals, 1847-1932, at 140-144 (1985).
  • Current Topics, 45 Alb LJ at 248, 287, 308, 367-368 (1892).
----, 48 Alb LJ 341 (1893).
----, 53 Alb LJ 385 (1896).
  • Democrats Will Cut Cook, NY Times, October 30, 1885, at 5.
  • Dragged Down by Maynard, NY Times, November 8, 1893, at 1.
  • Ex-Judge Maynard Dead, NY Times, July 13, 1896, at 1.
  • Frank, Supreme Court Appointments: II, 1941 Wis L Rev 343, 371.
  • Governor Flower's Curious Action, NY Times, December 23, 1892, at 1.
  • Isaac Horton Maynard, The Leading Citizens of Delaware County, www.dcynhistory.org/books/ brevie12.html, last accessed July 7, 2005.
  • Judge Maynard's letter in regard to the contested senatorial election cases: to Hon. Robert Earl . . . and Hon. David L. Follett of March 16, 1892, www.galenet.galegroup.com, last accessed August 1, 2005.
  • Judge Maynard's Record, NY Times, August 28, 1891.
  • Kurland, The Appointment and Disappointment of Supreme Court Justices, 1972 Law & Soc. Order 183, 210 (1972).
  • MacAdam, History of the bench and bar of New York, at 202 (1897).
  • Maynard Gets His Pay, NY Times, January 20, 1892, at 1.
  • Now Let Maynard Squirm, NY Times, March 25, 1892, at 1.
  • Not Through with Maynard Yet, NY Times, December 14, 1892, at 5.
  • O'Brien, The Nine Rejected Men, 19 Baylor L. Rev. 14, 15 (1967).
  • Rogers, A Desperate Chance, Harper's Weekly, October 1813, 1894. at 1.
  • Storm Emans's Backers, NY Times, February 2, 1892, at 1.
  • The Case of Judge Maynard, NY Tribune, October 8, 1893.
  • The Expected Whitewash, NY Times, April 19, 1892, at 1.
  • To Investigate Maynard, NY Times, March 9, 1892, at 1.
  • To Move Against Maynard, NY Times, February 22, 1892, at 3.
  • Verdict on Maynard Stands, NY Times, October 11, 1892, at 1.

New York Times

  • 1887, 252:
  • 1889, 824:
  • 1891,
    • 472: 28 Aug. 5-5:
  • 1892,
    • 539 [facts of theft, testimony]:
  • 1892, 609: 2 Feb., 1-2:
    • 3 Feb., 8-3:
    • 3 April, 4-6 [poem]:
    • 25 March, 4-6:
    • 753: 30 Aug. 1-4:
    • 14 Dec. 5-2:
    • 23 Dec. 1-4:
    • 31 Dec. 5-4 [appointed judge]:

— 1893: —

    • 895; 27 Jan., 2-1:
    • 966, [editorials] 7 Oct.:
    • 8 Oct.:
    • 10 Oct.:
    • 29 Oct.:

[there are many more]

1034:

    • Aug 31, 4-7,

4-6:

    • 10 Sept, 5-4:
    • 24 Sept. 2-3:
    • 30 Sept., 1-2:
    • 7 Oct., 1-1:
    • 7 Oct., 5-4:
    • 9 Oct., 2-4:
    • 11 Oct. 1-2:
    • 13 Oct., 1-3;
    • 13 Oct. 5-2:
    • 16 Oct. 2-5:
    • 17 Oct., 1-2;
    • 19 Oct., 4-6;
    • 19 Oct., 5-4:
    • 24 Oct., 8-3:
    • 26 Oct., 5-1:
    • 27 Oct., 1-7:
    • 31 Oct., 9-7:
    • 1 Nov. 8-1:
    • 2 Nov., 3-1:
    • 3 Nov., 1-7:
    • 4 Nov. 2-4:
    • 5 Nov. 10-6;
    • 5 Nov., 17-3:
    • 6 Nov., 4-6:
    • 23 Nov. 1-4:
    • 13 Dec., 1-3:

more to copy out from 1893 index. mostly denunciations.