Book- Arguments Of The Hon. Edward Stanly. And T. W. Park, Esq. With The Charge Of The Court, At The Trial Of Alfred A. Cohen On A Charge Of Embezzlement, In The Case Of Adams & Co., By H. M. Naglee, Receiver, Versus Alfred A. Cohen, In The District Court Of The Fourth Judicial District Of The State Of California, Hon. John S. Hager President, March, 1856...see newspaper article and challenge to a duel; (in collection...see ID 2010.01.04.00001). A lawsuit by the failed Adams & Company of California express company against Alfred Andrew Cohen (1829-1887). An early Jewish Gold Rush settler of California, Cohen was jailed on these dubious charges, studied law in prison, was acquitted, and went on to become a prominent lawyer and railroad financier. Cohen, Alfred A.; capitalist, and a lawyer of great ability; was born in London, England, July 17, 1829; died on the railroad train, near Sydney, Nebraska, while returning from N. Y. to S. F., Nov. 16, 1887; he sold the S. F. and Alameda R. R. Co's line to the Central Pacific R. R. Co.; a bitter controversy with the magnates of the latter company followed, and lasted several years, their complaint, for $106,306, damages, being filed in the 12th District Court, March 7, 1876 See following write up on the Challenge to a duel: ….King, taking advantage of the sailing of the American bark Undine with adventurers for San Francisco, secured passage and arrived there on November 10, 1848. He proceeded at once to the mines on the South Fork of the American river but, without remaining long, returned to Sacramento and entered the mercantile firm of Hensley, Reading & Co. of that place as a partner and book-keeper. From there, in the autumn of 1849 he returned to San Francisco and on December 5, 1849, in conjunction with Jacob R. Snyder, established and opened the banking house of "James King of Wm. & Co." on the southwest corner of Montgomery and Washington streets. On March 5, 1852, Snyder withdrew from the firm, and King then carried on the business alone, under the name of " James King of William." He succeeded in inspiring confidence in his integrity and made money as well as reputation. In May, 1851, his family, then consisting of a wife and four children, joined him; and, with brilliant prospects ahead, he erected for them a fine residence, kept horses and a carriage and lived in a style befitting his position as a prosperous banker. He was always exceedingly outspoken in the expression of his sentiments; and in various positions, and particularly as foreman of the grand jury of San Francisco in 1853, he was called upon to take a prominent and positive stand in reference to the moral and social abominations and the political corruptions which were reeking on every side of him. He was not found wanting at this task: on the contrary he got the reputation of, and became widely known as, a man, not only of honor and integrity but also of intelligence and courage. Unfortunately for him his employees were not all as honest, or at least as prudent, as himself; and one of them, by investing in certain mining and ditch property in Tuolumne County, involved him in difficulties, which threatened and in fact brought him to the verge of financial ruin. In June 1854, while King was in this position and suffering great anxiety for fear of not being able to meet his engagements, Isaiah C. Woods of the express and banking house of Adams & Co. proposed that, if he would turn over all his assets and enter the service of Adams & Co., that firm would assume all his liabilities and pay him a salary of a little over a thousand dollars per month. He accepted the offer, supposing the house to be perfectly solvent; and the house on its part readily ratified the bargain, knowing that King's assets with good management would be more than enough to meet all his liabilities and that his reputation for honesty would be worth much more than any possible loss by employing him. The contract was an employment for two years from June 27, 1854. For a short time everything went on well. But by degrees he became very much dissatisfied with Woods' methods of business and also with several of Woods' friends. One of these was Alfred A. Cohen, against whom he appears to have felt a great antipathy. In a few days after entering the house King expressed his dislike of Cohen; but, on Woods' representations that Cohen was a good friend of Adams & Co., King agreed to suppress his feelings. Sometime in August, however, according to King's statement, a conversation occurred in reference to a sale of gold-dust said to have been made by Cohen, as broker for Adams & Co., to Page, Bacon & Co.; and the result was very great ill-feeling between the two men. Both were evidently very hot-tempered. On July 14, 1855, a few months after the failure of Page, Bacon & Co. and Adams & Co. and the extensive losses among all classes of the people caused thereby, and while very great excitement prevailed in reference to the frauds that were supposed to have been perpetrated in the management of the Adams & Co. affairs, King published a newspaper card to the effect that Woods had on more than one occasion, in his presence and the presence of others, said that Adams & Co. made a hundred thousand dollars a year out of sales of gold-dust to Page, Bacon & Co. But he added that he himself had not had the slightest idea, until within five or six days, of any improper means having been made use of by Woods to effect such sales, which he then charged had been the case. Three days afterwards King and Cohen met in front of Barrett & Sherwood's jewelry store on Montgomery Street; and after a few heated words in reference to King's card, an encounter took place between them in which neither was hurt, but Cohen considered himself insulted. Later on the same day, evidently taking that view of the subject, and yielding to the then prevalent opinion on the subject of dueling, Cohen sent King a challenge. The challenge was carried to King by John K. Hackett; and the next day King replied, by Letter to Hackett and through the newspapers, declining to fight and giving as his chief reasons his duty to his family and his opposition to dueling on moral grounds. At the same time King announced that while nothing could induce him to change his principles upon the subject of dueling, his conscience was perfectly easy as to the right and propriety of defending himself if he should be assaulted. This open refusal on the part of King to fight a duel, being the first instance in California in which a prominent man born south of Mason and Dixon's line had taken that stand, at once raised him much higher than he stood before in the estimation of those classes of the community who were opposed to dueling. Though southern men still adhered to the "code," as it was called, most Northern men were opposed to it. The general public sentiment of the community was violently opposed to it, as was indicated by the adoption of the provision of the constitution of 1849, which declared that no citizen, thereafter fighting a duel or sending or accepting a challenge or who should act as second or knowingly aid or assist in a duel, should be allowed to hold any office of profit or enjoy the right of suffrage, and the statutes of the legislature of 1850, making the same acts felony punishable by imprisonment in the state prison. Such being the case, though little respect was paid to the constitution or the statute by public men, King's stand on the subject, on account of its accordance with the law and its being recognized as dictated by enlightened principle, was considered as doing him great credit and gained him very great applause. Nearly all the newspapers of the day heartily praised it; and no one dared to openly disapprove obedience to the constitution and statutes. Though some duels have since taken place and some men still adhere or profess to adhere to the code, few or no duels between otherwise respectable men have taken place for a number of years; and James King of William, more than any other man, is entitled to the praise of having started the movement that put a stop to the barbarous practice. James King of William is challenged to a duel by Mr. Alfred Cohen but refuses on moral reasons. Cohen, Alfred A.; capitalist, and a lawyer of great ability; was born in London, England, July 17, 1829; died on the railroad train, near Sydney, Nebraska, while returning from N. Y. to S. F., Nov. 16, 1887; he sold the S. F. and Alameda R. R. Co's line to the Central Pacific R. R. Co.; a bitter controversy with the magnates of the latter company followed, and lasted several years, their complaint, for $106,306, damages, being filed in the 12th District Court, March 7, 1876 See following write up on the Challenge to a duel: ….King, taking advantage of the sailing of the American bark Undine with adventurers for San Francisco, secured passage and arrived there on November 10, 1848. He proceeded at once to the mines on the South Fork of the American river but, without remaining long, returned to Sacramento and entered the mercantile firm of Hensley, Reading & Co. of that place as a partner and book-keeper. From there, in the autumn of 1849 he returned to San Francisco and on December 5, 1849, in conjunction with Jacob R. Snyder, established and opened the banking house of "James King of Wm. & Co." on the southwest corner of Montgomery and Washington streets. On March 5, 1852, Snyder withdrew from the firm, and King then carried on the business alone, under the name of " James King of William." He succeeded in inspiring confidence in his integrity and made money as well as reputation. In May, 1851, his family, then consisting of a wife and four children, joined him; and, with brilliant prospects ahead, he erected for them a fine residence, kept horses and a carriage and lived in a style befitting his position as a prosperous banker. He was always exceedingly outspoken in the expression of his sentiments; and in various positions, and particularly as foreman of the grand jury of San Francisco in 1853, he was called upon to take a prominent and positive stand in reference to the moral and social abominations and the political corruptions which were reeking on every side of him. He was not found wanting at this task: on the contrary he got the reputation of, and became widely known as, a man, not only of honor and integrity but also of intelligence and courage. Unfortunately for him his employees were not all as honest, or at least as prudent, as himself; and one of them, by investing in certain mining and ditch property in Tuolumne County, involved him in difficulties, which threatened and in fact brought him to the verge of financial ruin. In June 1854, while King was in this position and suffering great anxiety for fear of not being able to meet his engagements, Isaiah C. Woods of the express and banking house of Adams & Co. proposed that, if he would turn over all his assets and enter the service of Adams & Co., that firm would assume all his liabilities and pay him a salary of a little over a thousand dollars per month. He accepted the offer, supposing the house to be perfectly solvent; and the house on its part readily ratified the bargain, knowing that King's assets with good management would be more than enough to meet all his liabilities and that his reputation for honesty would be worth much more than any possible loss by employing him. The contract was an employment for two years from June 27, 1854. For a short time everything went on well. But by degrees he became very much dissatisfied with Woods' methods of business and also with several of Woods' friends. One of these was Alfred A. Cohen, against whom he appears to have felt a great antipathy. In a few days after entering the house King expressed his dislike of Cohen; but, on Woods' representations that Cohen was a good friend of Adams & Co., King agreed to suppress his feelings. Sometime in August, however, according to King's statement, a conversation occurred in reference to a sale of gold-dust said to have been made by Cohen, as broker for Adams & Co., to Page, Bacon & Co.; and the result was very great ill-feeling between the two men. Both were evidently very hot-tempered. On July 14, 1855, a few months after the failure of Page, Bacon & Co. and Adams & Co. and the extensive losses among all classes of the people caused thereby, and while very great excitement prevailed in reference to the frauds that were supposed to have been perpetrated in the management of the Adams & Co. affairs, King published a newspaper card to the effect that Woods had on more than one occasion, in his presence and the presence of others, said that Adams & Co. made a hundred thousand dollars a year out of sales of gold-dust to Page, Bacon & Co. But he added that he himself had not had the slightest idea, until within five or six days, of any improper means having been made use of by Woods to effect such sales, which he then charged had been the case. Three days afterwards King and Cohen met in front of Barrett & Sherwood's jewelry store on Montgomery Street; and after a few heated words in reference to King's card, an encounter took place between them in which neither was hurt, but Cohen considered himself insulted. Later on the same day, evidently taking that view of the subject, and yielding to the then prevalent opinion on the subject of dueling, Cohen sent King a challenge. The challenge was carried to King by John K. Hackett; and the next day King replied, by Letter to Hackett and through the newspapers, declining to fight and giving as his chief reasons his duty to his family and his opposition to dueling on moral grounds. At the same time King announced that while nothing could induce him to change his principles upon the subject of dueling, his conscience was perfectly easy as to the right and propriety of defending himself if he should be assaulted. This open refusal on the part of King to fight a duel, being the first instance in California in which a prominent man born south of Mason and Dixon's line had taken that stand, at once raised him much higher than he stood before in the estimation of those classes of the community who were opposed to dueling. Though southern men still adhered to the "code," as it was called, most Northern men were opposed to it. The general public sentiment of the community was violently opposed to it, as was indicated by the adoption of the provision of the constitution of 1849, which declared that no citizen, thereafter fighting a duel or sending or accepting a challenge or who should act as second or knowingly aid or assist in a duel, should be allowed to hold any office of profit or enjoy the right of suffrage, and the statutes of the legislature of 1850, making the same acts felony punishable by imprisonment in the state prison. Such being the case, though little respect was paid to the constitution or the statute by public men, King's stand on the subject, on account of its accordance with the law and its being recognized as dictated by enlightened principle, was considered as doing him great credit and gained him very great applause. Nearly all the newspapers of the day heartily praised it; and no one dared to openly disapprove obedience to the constitution and statutes. Though some duels have since taken place and some men still adhere or profess to adhere to the code, few or no duels between otherwise respectable men have taken place for a number of years; and James King of William, more than any other man, is entitled to the praise of having started the movement that put a stop to the barbarous practice. James King of William is challenged to a duel by Mr. Alfred Cohen but refuses on moral reasons. Cohen, Alfred A.; capitalist, and a lawyer of great ability; was born in London, England, July 17, 1829; died on the railroad train, near Sydney, Nebraska, while returning from N. Y. to S. F., Nov. 16, 1887; he sold the S. F. and Alameda R. R. Co's line to the Central Pacific R. R. Co.; a bitter controversy with the magnates of the latter company followed, and lasted several years, their complaint, for $106,306, damages, being filed in the 12th District Court, March 7, 1876 See following write up on the Challenge to a duel: ….King, taking advantage of the sailing of the American bark Undine with adventurers for San Francisco, secured passage and arrived there on November 10, 1848. He proceeded at once to the mines on the South Fork of the American river but, without remaining long, returned to Sacramento and entered the mercantile firm of Hensley, Reading & Co. of that place as a partner and book-keeper. From there, in the autumn of 1849 he returned to San Francisco and on December 5, 1849, in conjunction with Jacob R. Snyder, established and opened the banking house of "James King of Wm. & Co." on the southwest corner of Montgomery and Washington streets. On March 5, 1852, Snyder withdrew from the firm, and King then carried on the business alone, under the name of " James King of William." He succeeded in inspiring confidence in his integrity and made money as well as reputation. In May, 1851, his family, then consisting of a wife and four children, joined him; and, with brilliant prospects ahead, he erected for them a fine residence, kept horses and a carriage and lived in a style befitting his position as a prosperous banker. He was always exceedingly outspoken in the expression of his sentiments; and in various positions, and particularly as foreman of the grand jury of San Francisco in 1853, he was called upon to take a prominent and positive stand in reference to the moral and social abominations and the political corruptions which were reeking on every side of him. He was not found wanting at this task: on the contrary he got the reputation of, and became widely known as, a man, not only of honor and integrity but also of intelligence and courage. Unfortunately for him his employees were not all as honest, or at least as prudent, as himself; and one of them, by investing in certain mining and ditch property in Tuolumne County, involved him in difficulties, which threatened and in fact brought him to the verge of financial ruin. In June 1854, while King was in this position and suffering great anxiety for fear of not being able to meet his engagements, Isaiah C. Woods of the express and banking house of Adams & Co. proposed that, if he would turn over all his assets and enter the service of Adams & Co., that firm would assume all his liabilities and pay him a salary of a little over a thousand dollars per month. He accepted the offer, supposing the house to be perfectly solvent; and the house on its part readily ratified the bargain, knowing that King's assets with good management would be more than enough to meet all his liabilities and that his reputation for honesty would be worth much more than any possible loss by employing him. The contract was an employment for two years from June 27, 1854. For a short time everything went on well. But by degrees he became very much dissatisfied with Woods' methods of business and also with several of Woods' friends. One of these was Alfred A. Cohen, against whom he appears to have felt a great antipathy. In a few days after entering the house King expressed his dislike of Cohen; but, on Woods' representations that Cohen was a good friend of Adams & Co., King agreed to suppress his feelings. Sometime in August, however, according to King's statement, a conversation occurred in reference to a sale of gold-dust said to have been made by Cohen, as broker for Adams & Co., to Page, Bacon & Co.; and the result was very great ill-feeling between the two men. Both were evidently very hot-tempered. On July 14, 1855, a few months after the failure of Page, Bacon & Co. and Adams & Co. and the extensive losses among all classes of the people caused thereby, and while very great excitement prevailed in reference to the frauds that were supposed to have been perpetrated in the management of the Adams & Co. affairs, King published a newspaper card to the effect that Woods had on more than one occasion, in his presence and the presence of others, said that Adams & Co. made a hundred thousand dollars a year out of sales of gold-dust to Page, Bacon & Co. But he added that he himself had not had the slightest idea, until within five or six days, of any improper means having been made use of by Woods to effect such sales, which he then charged had been the case. Three days afterwards King and Cohen met in front of Barrett & Sherwood's jewelry store on Montgomery Street; and after a few heated words in reference to King's card, an encounter took place between them in which neither was hurt, but Cohen considered himself insulted. Later on the same day, evidently taking that view of the subject, and yielding to the then prevalent opinion on the subject of dueling, Cohen sent King a challenge. The challenge was carried to King by John K. Hackett; and the next day King replied, by Letter to Hackett and through the newspapers, declining to fight and giving as his chief reasons his duty to his family and his opposition to dueling on moral grounds. At the same time King announced that while nothing could induce him to change his principles upon the subject of dueling, his conscience was perfectly easy as to the right and propriety of defending himself if he should be assaulted. This open refusal on the part of King to fight a duel, being the first instance in California in which a prominent man born south of Mason and Dixon's line had taken that stand, at once raised him much higher than he stood before in the estimation of those classes of the community who were opposed to dueling. Though southern men still adhered to the "code," as it was called, most Northern men were opposed to it. The general public sentiment of the community was violently opposed to it, as was indicated by the adoption of the provision of the constitution of 1849, which declared that no citizen, thereafter fighting a duel or sending or accepting a challenge or who should act as second or knowingly aid or assist in a duel, should be allowed to hold any office of profit or enjoy the right of suffrage, and the statutes of the legislature of 1850, making the same acts felony punishable by imprisonment in the state prison.
Subject: Capitalism
No additional authority information available for Capitalism.