On the 19th day of July, 1865, I united with others, in depositing in the tomb in the cemetery of Hudson the mortal remains of Ambrose L. Jordan.  He departed this life on the 16th day of July, at his residence in New York, and appropriate funeral services had been held on the 18th at the Church of the Transfiguration in that city.  He died at the mature age of seventy-six years, having been born  [p. 95] in Hillsdale, in the county of Columbia, on the 5th day of May, 1789.

     As he was a native and long a resident of our county, as he reached high distinction in his profession and as he was one of the remaining links between the present and a past generation, it seems not unbecoming that here in the county of his birth some slight record should be preserved of the principal incidents of his career.

     Mr. Jordan, it is believed, received a fair, though not a collegiate, education, and improved in the best manner the advantages which were thrown in this way.  At the early age of twenty-three (in 1812) he is found in the practice of his profession at Cooperstown, in the county of Otsego, where his abilities were not unappreciated, for during his brief residence of seven or eight years in that county, in addition to a leading practice at the bar, he filled the responsible offices of surrogate and district attorney.

     About the year 1820 he was recalled to his native county of Columbia, and it is no small compliment to his growing reputation that, as common fame affirms, he was invited here by his friends to be the rival and antagonist of Elisha Williams, then in the full maturity of his great powers and at the very zenith of his fame.    

     Perhaps the Augustan age of the law in this county had already passed, an age in which, under the old constitution, Spencer and Kent and Thompson and Van Ness presided at the circuits, and Williams and Van Buren and Oakley and Grosvenor flourished at the bar.  Those were the grand old times; and although, doubtless, distance lends a somewhat factitious magnitude and enchantment to the view, it cannot be questioned that the judges and lawyers just named, with others of equal or nearly equal eminence, were splendid luminaries of the legal profession.

     But the period which immediately followed, under the constitution of 1821, was on of no small consideration in the annals of the profession in Columbia county.  Most of the names just referred to had disappeared from the public view.  The judges lost their office by the passage of the new constitution.  Spencer renewed the practice of his profession, but scarcely sustained the fame which had marked his judicial career.  Kent was soon appointed to be professor of law in Columbia College, and gave to the world those inestimable Commentaries which will forever honorably associate his name with the history of American law.

     Thompson, having previously been appointed secretary of the navy, was transferred to the bench of the Supreme Court of the United States, which he long adorned by his great abilities.  Van Ness fell a victim to an insidious disease, and in 1823, at the early age of forty-eight years, closed a professional and judicial career of uncommon brilliancy.  Grosvenor was also dead.  Oakley was soon appointed to the bench of the Superior Court in the city of New York.  Van Buren had already, to a great extent, withdrawn from the practice of his profession, which he never again resumed to any marked degree, having entered the Senate of the United States in 1821, where he remained for many years.  Of those just referred to by name, Williams alone remained on the theatre of his former labors to claim or dispute pre-eminence with old or new competitors.

     But Columbia county was not undistinguished in the the next decade in the walks of the legal profession.  There were (not to name others) Williams and Jordan and the [p. 96] Vanderpoels (James and Aaron), Monell, Tallmadge, Bushnell, Killian Miller, and Robert H. Morris.  Of these, it is no disparagement to the others to say that in the forensic department of the law Williams and Jordan took the lead.  They were both, though widely different, highly accomplished advocates.  Williams was probably the greater genius, Jordan the more accomplished scholar; Williams was rapid, ready, and impetuous, Jordan was more cautious, deliberate, and reflecting; Williams would rush into the forensic battle replying upon the the resources of his genius, Jordan would give to every cause the most careful preparation.  The latter was not so much distinguished for quickness of perception in the rapid change of tactics, yet no living speaker had a finer vocabulary at his command, was keener at repartee, or knew better how to put the right word in the right place.  Jordan was a man of fine person, of dignified and commanding presence, and easy and graceful elocution, of impressive manner, of musical voice, and of great fluency of speech.  Though not indifferent to political advancement, he wisely confined himself for the most part to the appropriate duties of his profession, where, more than in any other sphere, he was adapted to shine; he was, nevertheless, in several instances the recipient of political and official honors,--those already alluded to,--he having been surrogate and district attorney of Otsego county while resident therein.  In 1821, soon after his removal to Hudson, he was appointed recorder of that city, which office he held for several years.  In 1824, he was elected to the Assembly.  In 1825, for a period of four years, to the Senate of this State, which office, after three years' service, he resigned.  In 1846, though then a resident of the city of New York, he was elected to the constitutional convention from the county of Columbia, and in 1847 he was made the first attorney-general of the State under the new constitution.

     But, as I have said, his tastes as well as his mental endowments inclined him to the practice of his profession.  He continued to reside in Hudson until the year 1838, and was largely in demand as counsel in the neighboring circuits.  Williams had died in 1833; but, in addition to those of his own county, Jordan found able antagonists in various portions of the State, prominent among them being Samuel Stevens, Marcus T. Reynolds, Henry G. Wheaton, Henry R. Storrs, and Samuel Sherwood.

     In 1834 he removed to the city of New York, and there for a period of twenty years he was laboriously engaged in the practice of his profession, taking high rank therein, especially in the department of advocacy, among the distinguished lawyers of the metropolis.  He never failed to serve his clients with devoted zeal and uncompromising fidelity; and if in the heat of forensic contest he, like others of his profession, sometimes indulged in a vein of ridicule, of sarcasm, or of severe denunciation, for which he was well qualified by the copiousness and force of his vocabulary, no one who knew him will ever deny to him the possession of an honest, manly heart, or believed him to be insensible to the instincts of generosity and friendship.

     But the burden of his professional cares was ultimately too weighty for even his vigorous constitution, and--somewhere I think about the year 1859--he was stricken down with paralysis, and this calamity necessitated his withdrawal from active pursuits.  Since that time he lived for the most part in the privacy, serenity, and happiness of domestic life, and has at last yielded to that summons which all must ultimately obey.

     His talents and his virtues entitle him to a more extended and formal notice, but I have thought this brief tribute would not be altogether unacceptable to his friends from one who knew him well.

*From the pen of Hon. Henry Hogeboom

AMBROSE L. JORDAN.*

     The death of one so distinguished as Ambrose L. Jordan is an event which emphatically calls forth from those who have been associated with him in professional life tokens of respect and manifestations of personal regard.

     The name of Mr. Jordan is associated with my earliest recollections of the bar of this county.   I well remember the part he took in the trial of Taylor, for murder, and in the case of Poucher vs. Livingston, two of the most celebrated cases in the annals of the law in this county.

     While I was a student, Mr. Jordan occupied a most commanding position at the bar.  He was engaged in most of the cases which were tried, and he brought to the trial ability, eloquence, and wit which made him a most formidable antagonist and a most successful advocate.  The trial of a cause in those days was an intellectual contest, a gladiatorial combat of mind against mind, which elicited all the powers an capacities of the man, and all the learning and genius of the advocate.  Those may perhaps be characterized as the brilliant days of the profession, when eloquence, learning, and debate were permitted free scope, without the restraints which increasing business and modern rules have imposed.

     In those days the courts were the great forum for the exhibition of clashing intellects striving for the mastery.  When Williams and Jordan, and their compeers, Miller, Monell, Bushnell, Edmonds, and others, entered the arena, it was a struggle of giants.

     Mr. Jordan was distinguished for his manly beauty.  With an erect, commanding form, an expressive face, and an eye which, in moments of excitement, flashed like the eagle's, his appearance never failed to attract attention and to create a most favorable impression. I have often thought that, in the prime of his life, he was the perfection of physical and intellectual manhood.

     His style of oratory was of the highest order of forensic eloquence, his voice as soft and musical as the tones of the flute, his manner dignified and commanding, his elocution most fluent and graceful, and his diction in the highest degree terse, vigorous, and elegant.

     Although cool and deliberate in the trial of causes, he was quick at repartee and keen and unsparing in invective.  He was the possessor of rare wit and a bitter sarcasm, qualities which were often displayed in his addresses to juries as well as in the cross-examination of witnesses.  Unfortunate indeed was he who became the subject of his seathing (sic) rebuke.  No speaker had greater power of scornful expression than he possessed.

     [p. 97] Mr. Jordan was a man of great industry.  His cases were always prepared with the utmost thoroughness.  The large amount of business which claimed his attention made his life one of incessant labor.  Gifted as he was, self-reliant as he was, yet he never, until near the close of his life, relaxed his habits of study and labor.

     Mr. Jordan removed from this city to the city of New York about the time I was admitted to the bar.  There a larger field opened to him, and compensation more commensurate with his great abilities rewarded his efforts.

    No lawyer could be more devoted and faithful to his clients, or more earnest and effective in his advocacy of their rights.

     In private life Mr. Jordan enjoyed the esteem of all who knew him.  He was a man of generous sentiments, he had a high sense of honor, and was just and upright in all his dealings.

     He occupied during portions of his life places of political distinction, and it may be said that he enjoyed a full share of public honors, yet he never sought position or honors save those which belonged to his profession.  His heart was in the profession to which he devoted himself.  He loved its learning, its principles, its contest, and its victories with the enthusiasm of the true lawyer.

    The name of Ambrose L. Jordan will occupy a place not only with those who have conferred distinction on this county, but with the most distinguished and honored men of the State.

     He has gone to his last rest full of years and crowned with the triumphs of a brilliant career.  He left the field of his labors with a character unblemished, and with a professional renown which will make his bright example an encouragement to those who are traveling the same rugged path of professional labor.

*Written by Hon. Theodore Miller soon after Mr. Jordan's death.