January 26, 1916 - The day has been one of mingled sweets and bitters.

This marks three years since I posted the first letter on the blog. It is always a reminder of the untimely death of Joe's younger brother Meyer. Here is a letter written on the train from Bridgeport to New London.

January 26th
Dear Helen,
As you can see by the paper, I am on route “somewhere in Connecticut,” as the war dispatches would phrase it. My immediate destination is New London, and if the train doesn't jar too much, perhaps a few lines will be legible.
This week started out as a very tame one, but it looks like a banquet tonight; and a musical tomorrow night. Last night, modesty prevents my telling the name of the fellow who was installed as President of Harmony Lodge and Club, and of course we had quite a time, as men can sometimes.
Just passing Fairhaven where I spent my days at school.
In ten minutes we'll pass Branford. That town means much to me and always will. My dear father and brother Meyer, are resting in eternal peace there; and today is the third anniversary of my brothers decease.
The day has been one of mingled sweets and bitters. This morning, Henry Saltman was successful in recovering a rather large judgment (over $8,000), and that made both him and me happy. Of course I was sorry that I couldn't join in, Butz' and Edith's “Little journey down Bway,” but was glad to hear the nice things that were said, though if present that wouldn't have occurred, and for this perhaps I might be sorry to.
I can't tell now just when I'll arrive at N.Y. on Friday, but I've an engagement at 2:30 and another at 4. After which I'll look up some tickets. It doesn't seem I'll arrive much before 2:15, and will probably take the train arriving at N.Y. then.
By the way, will the party or whatever technical name it enjoys, on Saturday be formal or what? Not that it matters, except in Florida one wears flannels, in contrast to furs used in Alaska. My cold received such a fine reception that it returned for a “return performance,” but it's slight and will take airy wings, I know.
I've got a ream of paper to wade through to become familiar with the exact details; and besides, the lurching and swaying of the train is making me cross-eyed while trying to follow what I say; and will probably make you dizzy when deciphering it.
The Porter is ready to announce “First call for dinner,” and not having had lunch, leaves no room for doubt where I may be found for the next half hour.
Sincerely,
Joe

The next letter will be February 2.

January 24, 1916 - From Zionism to Local Crime

Here is a letter with many diverse topics. I have linked the areas that I think may need some explanation.

 

January 24,1916.

Dear Helen:
Do you remember remarking that Dr.Wise was not as vehement in his reply to the recent criticisms on Zionism as might be expected from so powerful an orator and debater? Mr. Brandeis told me that Dr.Wise was very ill on Saturday,and was contemplating postponing his Southern trip, unless the physician permitted him to go, and he was rather surprised and happy to learn that Dr.Wise had recovered so as to be able to attend and conduct his services in so able a manner.

During the afternoon,I also had an opportunity to spend some little time with Congressman Garland from the Pitts­burgh district,in fact we dined together,and he being a man of about 350 avoirdupois, you can imagine my envying his appetite. He is the Congressman who introduced a rather unique prepared­ness program,and will probably explain the same in a few days.

What I intended to say, however is that early this morning I called the Metropolitan,and was informed that the house had been sold out a week or so ago,and that there wasn't a thing left to be had. It is rather discouraging, but I have heard such things before. At present I cannot think of any other method of securing any reservation,but then, perhaps a stray idea might come a strolling along to relieve the situation. Do you know whether Tyson's have anything to do with the Opera,or do they only look after the other theatres?

The Committee on Arrangements of our Club that is planning a large Charity Ball in March have left,and the atmosphere resembles the smelting district of the aforesaid Pittsburgh.Did you ever go through the old Hoosic Tunnel? That's what the office looks and smells like at this moment.But they are engaged in a good work, and if they enjoy smoking, let them have it. It reminds one of Bill Nye's stories of Sir Walter Raleigh appearing before Queen Lizzie smoking his first corn cob of uncured green tobacco.

There has been a very revolting crime committed in Shelton some months ago,and the authorities have just apprehended the guilty-that is the suspected guilty-parties; and upon reading one confession,and the notes of the testimony that will be given tomorrow by various witnesses for the State,it simply makes one disgusted. In such a modem time,it doesn't seem possible or even conceivable that relics of the second century before Noah's days, if ever there was such a time,could be found among us.Why in the wildest dreams of depravity or criminology,the normal person could not conjure up such crimes,and I am rather surprised to hear of it. But why thrust this on you?

Oh yes,that cold is rapidly departing,and if it keeps up at its present speed,ought to be quite aways from here by tomorrow or Wednesday."Non mia voce" does not apply at all.

Sincerely,
Joe
The next letter is January 26.

January 20, 1916 - Bill Nye's History of the United States

Here is a fun letter because it refers to "Bill Nye". This is obviously not the Bill Nye of today but in fact Edgar Wilson Nye aka Bill Nye.

January 20, 1916

Dear Helen,
I was very agreeably surprised yesterday afternoon when the letter carrier handed me a package, and my delight was unbounded when I found it was "Bill Nye".

You certainly have a memory yourself, for I imagine it was only casually that I mentioned the book that brought a fresh and peculiar atmosphere on American history, and added to the fact that it is a European book and rather rare, makes it all the more appreciable. I had been thinking of getting one; and now I've got it. Many thanks.

This week has been one of considerable "eats". Banquets actually every night. One more tonight; but fortunately none tomorrow and I decided not to attend Saturday's. Next week appears to be a very quiet New England style week, where I may retire at ten each night if I care to, to make up for lost time this week.
Barnet has just arrived for a moment, and it being near six, I'll take him home,

Sincerely,
Joe

This book that Helen sent Joe was written in 1894. Nye was the writer and the book was illustrated by Fred'k B Opper. I was actually able to get a copy in pdf from the Internet Archive.
 

Thought it would be fun for you to see some of the pages from the book.  Above is the front piece.

Here is the first of four pages from the Table of Contents.

A miscellaneous page from the book mentioning the Brooklyn Bridge.

His funny Appendix to this humorous book.

The next letter will be January 24.

January 10, 1916 - A note to Barnet, Joe's nephew.

Here is one page of a letter that Joe wrote his nephew Barnet, oldest son of his brother Charles. Barnet was about five years old. As you can see Joe enjoyed his role as uncle and used his pen to communicate his playful stories.

January 10, 1916

Dear Barnet,

Grandma Shapiro told me that you visited her yesterday and had some fresh custard. And when I arrived last night, I went to the cubbard (cupboard) but found it was bare. What story does that remind you of?

I was in New York Saturday, and when I went into one of the toy stores, I saw a little boy sitting in a corner; he had a pie in his lap and was chewing a plumb. The man said he was a good boy.

Here is a photograph of Barnet with Helen on the front porch of Joe's mothers home. Cats and dogs were always favorites in their home.

The next letter will be on January 20.

January 5, 1916 - Mistrial because of juror's strange action . . .

As a follow-up to the letter Joe wrote to Helen on January 3, 1916 here are two of three articles that hit the newspapers on January 5, 1916. All of that hard work and this small mistake changes the outcome. I am continuing to do research to see what happened when the case was brought back to court and what the verdict was.

 MISTRIAL FOUND BECAUSE JUROR’S STRANGE ACTION

Judge Gager Dismissed Jury in Auto Accident Case After Notification.

JUROR-HANDED NOTE TO DEFENDANT'S COUNSEL

Intention Was Honest, but Oath Was Unwittingly Broken, Said Court.

Through an incident about as ex­ceptional as ever recorded in jury tri­als in this county the case of Benja­min Feinman, administrator, against Caspar D. Wallace, was this morning taken from the jury because of the threat of mistrial.
A juror just before court opened handed to Judge A. B. Beers of coun­sel for Mr. Wallace a slip of paper which stated that there was a juror sitting on the case from the town where the accident happened.
The juror who handed the slip of paper to Judge Beers, was William H. Wessels of Greenwich. Judge Beers immediately informed Judge Edwin B. Gager and his honor, after thinking it over decided that the jury should no longer be retained on the matter.

Oath Violated.

It was not the presence of a juror from Bridgeport which had anything to do with Judge Gager's decision, but it was the fact that a juror had violat­ed his oath, unintentionally as Judge Gager said, in communicating with persons not on the jury regarding the case, which led the court to rule a mistrial.
Juror Wessels was very sorry when he found out how much trouble he had made over a matter of no concern. There is nothing in the law to prevent a juror from a town in which a case is returned sitting on that case. Mr. Wessels thought it did. He apologized after Judge Gager dis­missed the jury.

Has Jury Experience.

The curious thing about it is that Mr. Wessels is a man of considerable jury experience. He is in business in East Portchester in Greenwich, and is a man of the highest standing in that town. He is a relation of form­er Mayor Wessels of this city.
The action on trial is a suit to re­cover $10,000 for the death of a boy of four years, killed 'in April, 1914 on Congress Street in an automobile ac­cident.
The trial was commenced yesterday. Judge Alfred B. Beers and Judge Carl Foster appeared for the defendant, At­torney Joseph G. Shapiro for the plaintiff. A considerable part of the evidence had been put in when court recessed yesterday afternoon.

Hands Note to Judge Beers.

This morning when the court was about to open Juror Wessels handed the note to Judge Beers. The latter quickly realized that a situation had suddenly presented itself which must be brought to the attention of the court. Innocent as the purpose might be, such communication was contrary to the law.
Judge Gager was informed and he also realized the gravity of the seem­ingly unwitting action. After some consideration Judge Gager decided to dismiss the jury from further consid­eration of the case.

Court Calls Jury.

The jury was called in and Judge Gager addressed them. He said he regretted having to take the course he was about to, but under the cir­cumstances it was necessary. He also regretted having to name the juror. He told the jury that Mr. Wessels had communicated with the counsel one side.
Judge Gager went on to say that Mr. Wessels had informed counsel that there was a man on the panel from the town where the accident occurred. Judge Gager said this was nothing in itself. There was no rea­son for disqualification on that ac­count. Mr. Wessels had acted hon­estly, one might almost say, he had, been too honest.
The court read the jurors' oath which swears a juror not to com­municate with any one regarding the case on trial, except a member of the jury. This oath, the court believ­ed, had been violated, unwittingly, it is true, but none the less violated. For this reason, his honor considered it proper to dismiss the jury from furth­er hearing upon the case. His hon­or said further that if the jury thought anything was wrong it should be communicated to the court, which was impartial.
Mr. Wessels stood up manfully and made an apology for his act. He did not realize what the consequences of his act were. He hoped the court would excuse him.
It turned out from a study of the jury panel that there were in reality two Bridgeport men among the twelve, John H. Colgan of 301 Arctic street and Isaac P. Turney the well-known West End newsdealer.
The incident created a considerable, stir about the court house. The old­est inhabitant could not recall any­thing quite like it since the building was put up nearly thirty years ago.

JUROR PASSES NOTE, DAMAGE CASE HALTED

Court  Withdraws Wallace Damage Suit Because of W. H. Wessels' Action.

OATH IS INNOCENTLY BROKEN; NO CENSURE

Greenwich Man Only Wanted to Tell Counsel that One Juror Lived Where Accident Occurred.

Because Juror William H. Wessels of Greenwich passed a note to Attorney A. B. Beers, informing the latter that there was a Bridgeport man on the jury, which was considering the $10,000 dam­age suit of Benjamin Feinman, administrator, against Casper D. Wallace, Judge Ed­win B. Gager this morning in the Civil Superior Court discharged the jury from further consideration in the case, holding that Juror Wessels had innocently broken his oath as a juror, and under the cir­cumstances the court thought that the case should be with­drawn from the jury. Juror Wessels publicly apologized to the court and the apology was accepted.

VIOLATION INNOCENT

There were two men from this city sitting as jurors on the case, John H. Colgan and Isaac P. Turney. It is understood that Juror Wessels referred to Mr. Colgan in his note to At­torney Beers. Before court opened this morning, Juror Wessels passed a note to Attorney Beers conveying the information that a man from the place in which the accident was al­leged to have occurred was acting as a juror. Attorney Beers felt that it was his duty to inform the court of the note, and did so.
Judge Gager immediately took the matter under consideration, and after the jury had been called, he informed them that after thinking the. matter over, he had concluded that he would dismiss them from further considera­tion of the case. He said that one of the jurors had seen fit to hand a slip to one of the counsel in the case that there was a certain juror from the town in which the accident oc­curred, and that such action on the juror's part was an innocent breach of his oath. The court told the jury that it was the duty of each juror to keep his own counsel and that the law provides he shall not speak on the matter he shall have in hand, except with the jurors on the case.

Juror Not Censured

It was Judge Gager's opinion that Juror Wessels had acted with honest motives in  passing the note  to  the lawyer, and he did not censure the juror. He told the jurors that while they must not speak about any phase | of a case, they may have under consideration to anyone but a member of the jury, they had the right to men­tion anything which they thought should come to the attention of the court, to the judge. Judge Gager stated that the attorney did his duty in calling the court's attention to the fact that he had received the note.
It is understood that Juror Wessels received his information from an­other member of the jury, and that he gave the information to the law­yer for the defense, thinking that the latter should know that there was a juror from the town where the acci­dent occurred. There seemed to be no question but what Juror Wessels had the highest motive in passing the information to the lawyer and he felt badly over the sudden termination of the case because of his action, for be­fore Judge Gager had finished talking to the jury, he arose from his seat in the jury box and said, "I would like to apologize publicly to the court." The court accepted the apology. History of Case. Feinman sued Wallace for $10,000 damages claiming that the latter's automobile struck and killed his four-year-old son, Samuel, on Congress street, and that the death was caused by the reckless manner in which the defendant's machine was being operated.
Shapiro & Shapiro represented the plaintiff, and Attorneys Foster and Beers the defendant. There being no work for the jury this week, Judge Gager excused them until next Tuesday morning at 10 o'clock.

It appears from this article that the jury was excused until Tuesday January 11.

I did a little research about Judge Gager and found a photograph from the firm he was with at one time in Derby CT as seen below.

 

In the photograph are Col. Wm. B. Wooster (L) with three members of his Derby law firm who went on to become judges - William H.  Williams, Chief Justice David Torrance, and Edwin B. Gager.

I was also able to locate his obituary in New New York Times from April 29, 1922.

The next letter will be posted on January 10.

January 3, 1915 - Standing by the grave of that young soul . . .

So begins a very active letter writing year for Joe. I look at the stack of letters that I have carefully cataloged by date. Each letter, postcard and envelope now place in protective sleeves so the fragile paper does not fall apart. The articles are often a bit more delicate and I work to preserve them so I can publish articles that match up with the dates and letters on the blog. The pile of letters posted in the past two years is much shorter than what is to come.

Here is a photo to illustrate what I am facing.

 This gives an idea of the condition of the articles. I can not use all of them but will choose clippings that add some depth to the life of Joseph Shapiro.

Here is the first letter of 1916.

January 3,1916
I know that this letter is what you call curt. I have been at work till quite late to-night preparing for a jury trial tomorrow, and just before closing up the machine thought I'd drop you a line. Speaking of dropping a line reminds me to quote the peroration of my closing address, an idea, that I fished out of the ink pot a few moments ago, and took my brother by surprise. I might add that I make no comment now of the facts or names, because I am very tired,

"Counsel would excite your sympathy for this venerable defendant, He would even refer to his patriotism and to his valor. I do not complain of this; think as kindly as you may of him, and of his brave conduct in the days of yore. That is natural, and it is right. But, even in the matter of sympathy there is another side to this case. Take that mother there and her children, with the father bowed down in grief, and go to that lone and lonely kirkyard, and standing by the grave of that young soul fresh from God already given back to Him who gave it, there beside that grave, unmarked by stone or monument, unknown, unhonored, and unsung, standing by the grave of that baby killed by an automobile, in view of that great sorrow, there write your verdict and when you have done that, the demands of these broken hearts will have been stilled, and a lost soul mutely but partly atoned for,"

Still I have a hunch that the case would be settled ere I get started in the morning.
And my brother is plowing away preparing an argument for the Supreme Court in behalf of a man convicted of murder and sentenced to be hanged; which he is to deliver in the morning in Hartford.
By the way, I asked a friend to get me some seats for Leo. He sent me the enclosed as the best he could secure, and if they are agreeable, I expect to be in New York Saturday, and could go; but they are yours to await your doing with them as you see fit.

Sincerely,
Joe

* Peroration is the concluding part of a speech, typically intended to inspire enthusiasm in the audience.

 Two articles from this case will be posted on January 5.